Part V: The Union

The Union Judiciary

Article 134: Appellate jurisdiction of Supreme Court in regard to criminal matters

--- Original Article ---

(1) An appeal shall lie to the Supreme Court from any judgment, final order or sentence in a criminal proceeding of a High Court in the territory of India if the High Court—

(a) has on appeal reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced him to death; or

(b) has withdrawn for trial before itself any case from any court subordinate to its authority and has in such trial convicted the accused person and sentenced him to death; or

(c) 1[certifies under article 134A] that the case is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court:

Provided that an appeal under sub-clause (c) shall lie subject to such provisions as may be made in that behalf under clause (1) of article 145 and to such conditions as the High Court may establish or require.

(2) Parliament may by law confer on the Supreme Court any further powers to entertain and hear appeals from any judgment, final order or sentence in a criminal proceeding of a High Court in the territory of India subject to such conditions and limitations as may be specified in such law.

1. Subs. by s. 19, ibid., for "certifies" (w.e.f. 1-8-1979).

Explanations

Article 134 of the Constitution of India provides a special appellate jurisdiction to the Supreme Court in criminal matters, allowing it to hear appeals against judgments, final orders, or sentences passed by High Courts. This appellate power is crucial to ensure that the highest court in the country can review cases where the most severe punishments, such as the death penalty, have been imposed, or where a High Court deems a case fit for further scrutiny by the Supreme Court. The article aims to protect against any miscarriage of justice and offers a higher recourse in serious criminal cases.

Clause-by-Clause Explanation

1. Situations in which an Appeal Lies to the Supreme Court

Under Article 134(1), an appeal may be made to the Supreme Court from any judgment, final order, or sentence passed in a criminal proceeding by a High Court in India, provided the following conditions are met:

Clause (1)(a): Reversal of Acquittal and Sentencing to Death

If the High Court, on appeal, reverses an acquittal and sentences the accused person to death, the Supreme Court has the jurisdiction to hear an appeal. This ensures that in cases where the death penalty is imposed after reversing a previous acquittal, the accused gets a chance to appeal to the highest judicial body in the country.

Clause (1)(b): Withdrawal of Cases by High Court and Death Sentence

If a High Court withdraws any case for trial from a lower court and, after conducting the trial, convicts and sentences the accused to death, an appeal can be made to the Supreme Court. This provision allows scrutiny over cases where the High Court itself assumes jurisdiction over a case initially tried by a subordinate court.

Clause (1)(c): Certification for Appeal by High Court under Article 134A

If the High Court certifies under Article 134A that a case is fit for appeal to the Supreme Court, the appeal may be heard. However, such appeals are subject to the conditions laid down by Article 145(1), as well as any additional provisions or requirements imposed by the High Court. Article 134A, which was introduced by the Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978, allows for such certifications, adding an additional layer of judicial discretion for appeal to the Supreme Court.

2. Further Powers Conferred by Parliament

Parliament is empowered to grant the Supreme Court additional powers to entertain and hear appeals from any judgment, final order, or sentence in criminal proceedings by a High Court. Parliament may specify conditions and limitations in laws conferring such powers, ensuring that the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court can evolve and expand as needed to address emerging legal complexities.

Amendments

The term "certifies" in Clause (1)(c) was substituted by the Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978 with a reference to Article 134A, which allows High Courts to certify cases fit for appeal to the Supreme Court.

This amendment, effective from 1 August 1979, strengthened the framework for appellate jurisdiction by adding an extra procedural step to ensure that only cases of significant importance or complexity are escalated to the Supreme Court.

Real-Life Examples

• State of Tamil Nadu vs Nalini (1999): In the Rajiv Gandhi assassination case, the Supreme Court heard appeals under Article 134 when the High Court reversed the acquittals of some of the accused and sentenced them to death. The Supreme Court’s intervention in such cases demonstrates the importance of its appellate jurisdiction in ensuring that capital punishment cases receive the highest level of judicial scrutiny.
• Mohd. Arif @ Ashfaq vs The Registrar, Supreme Court of India (2014): The appellant challenged his death sentence after the High Court had confirmed it. The case showcased the importance of appellate jurisdiction in criminal cases, particularly those involving capital punishment, to ensure that all legal avenues are explored before enforcing the death penalty.

Historical Significance

The appellate jurisdiction granted under Article 134 reflects India's commitment to ensuring justice in the most severe criminal cases. By allowing appeals in death sentence cases, the framers of the Constitution ensured a safeguard against potential errors in judicial decisions at the High Court level. The Forty-fourth Amendment further solidified this framework, emphasizing the need for judicial discretion before cases can be escalated to the Supreme Court.

Legislative History

Article 134 of the Indian Constitution, originally drafted and debated as Article 111A of the Draft Constitution on June 13 and 14, 1949, was subsequently incorporated into the Indian Constitution.

Debates and Amendments

In the Constituent Assembly debates, Pandit Thakur Das Bhargava initiated discussions on the necessity and scope of appeals to the Supreme Court in criminal cases, advocating for appeals in cases involving convictions after acquittals, death sentences, and other significant matters certified by the High Court. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar introduced an amendment allowing Parliament to empower the Supreme Court to hear appeals in criminal cases, marking a departure from more specific provisions initially suggested.

Shri Jaspat Roy Kapoor and other members stressed the importance of clear constitutional provisions for appeals in criminal cases, particularly to ensure judicial independence in death sentence cases and substantial legal issues. Dr. Ambedkar’s proposed Article 111-A aimed to address exceptional cases, particularly those involving death sentences, ensuring at least one appeal in capital punishment cases. The amendment was adopted, granting the Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction in specific criminal cases, particularly those involving death sentences, with provisions for future legislative expansion by Parliament.

References

• The Constitution (Forty-fourth Amendment) Act, 1978
• State of Tamil Nadu vs Nalini (1999)
• Mohd. Arif @ Ashfaq vs The Registrar, Supreme Court of India (2014)