Part V: The Union

The Union Judiciary

Article 129: Supreme Court to be a court of record

--- Original Article ---

The Supreme Court shall be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself.

Explanations

Article 129 of the Constitution of India establishes the Supreme Court as a court of record. This status grants the Court significant powers, including the authority to record and preserve judicial proceedings and judgments, as well as the power to punish for contempt. This article ensures the Supreme Court's judgments are final and binding, with legal consequences for any disobedience or disrespect.

Clause-by-Clause Explanation

1. Supreme Court as a Court of Record

The term "court of record" signifies that the decisions, proceedings, and records of the Supreme Court are preserved for perpetuity and serve as evidence of the statements and events in legal disputes. These records hold an authoritative status and can be referred to in subsequent legal cases. As a court of record, the Supreme Court has the power to bind lower courts with its decisions, ensuring uniformity and adherence to legal principles across the judicial system.

2. Power to Punish for Contempt

One of the crucial powers conferred upon the Supreme Court as a court of record is its authority to punish for contempt of court. Contempt includes actions that disobey or disrespect the court's authority, such as non-compliance with judgments, or conduct that obstructs the administration of justice. The Supreme Court has the power to impose penalties, including fines or imprisonment, to uphold its dignity and ensure the proper functioning of the legal system.

Real-Life Examples

• Prashant Bhushan Contempt Case (2020): In 2020, prominent lawyer Prashant Bhushan was held guilty of contempt by the Supreme Court for his tweets criticizing the judiciary. The Court ruled that these tweets undermined public confidence in the judiciary and thus constituted contempt. Bhushan was fined ₹1, illustrating how Article 129 grants the Supreme Court the power to punish contemptuous acts to safeguard its integrity and public trust.
• Arundhati Roy Contempt Case (2002): In 2002, author Arundhati Roy was convicted of criminal contempt by the Supreme Court for making statements that were deemed to have undermined the dignity of the judiciary. She was sentenced to a day's imprisonment and fined ₹2,000. This case highlighted the importance of Article 129 in safeguarding the respect and authority of the judiciary, as the court took action to maintain its position and credibility in society.

Historical Significance

The inclusion of Article 129 in the Constitution underscores the framers’ intention to safeguard the judicial system’s autonomy and authority. The concept of a court of record, borrowed from British legal traditions, was designed to maintain the supremacy and integrity of the highest court in India. The power to punish contempt ensures that the rule of law is upheld and respected at all levels.

Legislative History

Article 129 of the Indian Constitution, newly introduced and discussed as article 108 of the Draft Constitution, was subsequently incorporated into the Indian Constitution on May 27, 1949.

Debates and Amendments

During the Constituent Assembly debates on the consideration of Article 108, there was a detailed discussion about its wording and potential implications. Shri H. V. Kamath proposed an amendment, suggesting that the Supreme Court should have the flexibility to sit at locations chosen by the Chief Justice with the President's approval, rather than specifying Delhi as the permanent seat. Kamath argued that fixing Delhi as the seat was unnecessary and inconsistent with other constitutional provisions, which did not specify the locations for other state organs.

In response, Dr. B. R. Ambedkar proposed a solution by dividing Article 108 into two parts. This approach separated the provisions concerning the powers and status of the Supreme Court from those dealing with its location. Ambedkar clarified that the Supreme Court, being a court of record, possesses the authority to ensure its decisions are respected and maintain its dignity through the power to punish for contempt. He emphasized the importance of this distinction, noting that the division made the Court’s status and authority more explicit.

Dr. Ambedkar’s proposal to divide Article 108 into two parts was accepted, leading to the adoption of two separate provisions. The first focused on defining the Supreme Court’s powers and status as the highest judicial authority, ensuring its ability to enforce its judgments. The second part addressed the flexibility regarding the Court's location, allowing it to sit in Delhi or other places, as determined by the Chief Justice with the President's approval.

References

• Constitution of India, Article 129 – Provides the legal framework for the Supreme Court’s powers as a court of record.
• Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
• Prashant Bhushan Contempt of Court Case, 2020.
• Arundhati Roy Contempt of Court Case, 2002.