Part V: The Union

The Union Judiciary

Article 145: Rules of Court, etc.

Overview of Article 145: Rules of Court, etc.

--- Original Article ---

Subject to the provisions of any law made by Parliament, the Supreme Court may from time to time, with the approval of the President, make rules for regulating generally the practice and procedure of the Court...

Explanations

Article 145 of the Constitution of India provides the framework for the Supreme Court to regulate its procedures and practices, subject to the approval of the President and laws enacted by Parliament. This article ensures that the highest court in India has the necessary autonomy to function effectively while adhering to constitutional mandates. Over the years, the article has been amended to reflect evolving judicial practices, and it continues to play a vital role in the operation of the Supreme Court.

Clause-by-Clause Explanation

(1) Rules for Practice and Procedure

The Supreme Court, with the approval of the President, is empowered to formulate rules for its operations. These rules cover various aspects, such as:

  • Rules regarding practitioners: This allows the Court to set guidelines for those who practice before it, ensuring only qualified individuals represent cases.
  • Appeals and their procedures: The Court can define procedures for hearing appeals, including the timeframe within which they must be filed.
  • Proceedings for enforcing Fundamental Rights: This sub-clause is crucial for safeguarding Part III of the Constitution, which deals with Fundamental Rights.
  • Proceedings under Article 139A: Added via the Forty-second Amendment Act, 1976, this clause pertains to cases of transfer of cases from one High Court to another or the Supreme Court, ensuring consistency in judicial interpretations.
  • Appeals under Article 134(1)(c): This clause allows the Court to entertain appeals in criminal cases referred by High Courts.
  • Reviews of judgments and orders: The Court is authorized to formulate rules for reviewing its judgments and orders, setting timelines for such reviews.
  • Costs and fees: The Supreme Court sets the costs related to proceedings and the fees charged in its registry.
  • Bail provisions: Rules regarding the granting of bail are regulated by the Supreme Court to ensure justice in matters where personal liberty is involved.
  • Stay of proceedings: This clause allows the Court to make rules on staying proceedings where necessary.
  • Frivolous or vexatious appeals: The Court is empowered to summarily dismiss appeals that appear to be frivolous or intended to delay the process of justice.
  • Inquiries under Article 317(1): The Supreme Court can establish rules for inquiries related to the removal of members of the Public Service Commission, further strengthening its role in ensuring institutional integrity.

(2) Fixing the Minimum Number of Judges

The Supreme Court can fix the minimum number of Judges who will sit for any specific purpose, including powers of single Judges or Division Courts. This is subject to parliamentary laws.

(3) Minimum Judges for Substantial Constitutional Questions

The Forty-second Amendment, 1976, replaced earlier provisions to set the minimum number of Judges at five for cases involving substantial questions of constitutional interpretation or those referred under Article 143. This safeguard ensures that significant cases are heard by a larger bench, reflecting the importance of such questions. The Forty-third Amendment, 1977, further modified the language of this clause.

(4) Open Court Judgments

No judgment shall be delivered except in an open court, ensuring transparency in the judicial process. Similarly, no report under Article 143 shall be made without being delivered in open court.

(5) Majority Concurrence in Judgments

Judgments of the Supreme Court must be delivered with the concurrence of a majority of Judges, but dissenting opinions are permitted. This feature upholds the principle of collective deliberation while allowing for differing judicial opinions.

Historical Context

Article 145 has seen several amendments, primarily through the Forty-second Amendment Act, 1976, and the Forty-third Amendment Act, 1977, which revised certain provisions to address practical judicial concerns. These amendments refined the process by which constitutional questions and substantial legal matters are addressed, reinforcing the rule of law.

Real-Life Examples

  • Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala (1973): In this case, a 13-Judge Bench was constituted to interpret the Constitution's basic structure doctrine, reflecting the significance of Article 145(3).
  • S. P. Gupta vs. Union of India (1981): This case dealt with judicial independence and the transfer of judges, demonstrating the importance of judicial integrity under Article 145.

References

  1. The Constitution of India (Bare Act).
  2. Kesavananda Bharati vs. State of Kerala (1973).
  3. S. P. Gupta vs. Union of India (1981).
  4. Constitutional Law of India by H.M. Seervai.
  5. Indian Constitutional Law by M.P. Jain.

Legislative History

Article 145 of the Indian Constitution, originally drafted and deliberated as Article 121 of the Draft Constitution, was incorporated into the Indian Constitution on June 6, 1949.

Debates and Amendments

In the discussions, Mr. Z. H. Lari proposed the deletion of the words "with the approval of the President" from clause (1) of Article 121, arguing that this requirement represented undue executive interference in judicial matters...

Article 144 Article 146