Isabella Carter
The Supreme Court of India is the country's highest judicial court and the final court of appeal under the Constitution of India. The Court has the power of judicial review and can annul a law framed by Parliament if it violates the Constitution. This has been demonstrated in several landmark constitutional cases, such as the Kesavananda Bharati case, which established the doctrine of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution, and the Minerva Mills case, which struck down two changes made to the Constitution by the 42nd Amendment Act 1976. Other notable constitutional cases include the Shah Bano Begum case, a milestone for Muslim women's rights, and the Nabam Rebia case, which held that a Speaker cannot adjudicate upon disqualification petitions when a notice of intention to remove them from office is issued.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Highest judicial court | Supreme Court of India |
| Highest court of appeal | Supreme Court of India |
| Power to annul laws framed by Parliament | Supreme Court of India |
| First female justice | Fatima Beevi |
| Important cases | Shah Bano Begum case, Kesavananda Bharati Case, Minerva Mills Case, Triple Talaq Judgement, Nabam Rebia case, Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja |
| Year of important cases | 1985, 1973, 1980, N/A, 2023, 2023 |
Explore related products
What You'll Learn
The Supreme Court of India
The Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of India and a maximum of 33 fellow judges, with extensive powers in the form of original, appellate and advisory jurisdictions. As the apex constitutional court, it takes up appeals primarily against verdicts of the High Courts of various states and tribunals. As an advisory court, it hears matters that are referred by the President of India.
The Supreme Court was established on 28 January 1950, replacing the Federal Court of India and the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, which were previously at the apex of the Indian court system. The first Chief Justice of India was H. J. Kania. The Supreme Court initially had its seat at the Chamber of Princes in the parliament building, where the Federal Court of India had sat from 1937 to 1950. In 1958, the Supreme Court moved to its present premises.
The Supreme Court has handed down several landmark judgments, including the following:
- In the Nabam Rebia case, it was held that a Speaker cannot adjudicate upon disqualification petitions when a notice of intention to move a resolution for the Speaker's removal from office is issued.
- In the Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja case, three State Amendments were made to the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, essentially allowing the practice of "Jallikattu" in Tamil Nadu, "Kambala" in Karnataka and "bullock cart race" in Maharashtra.
- In the Advance Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Gurudasmal case, it was held that the term "State" in the Constitution must be read to include Union Territories, unless the context otherwise requires.
- In the Minerva Mills case (1980) judgement, the Supreme Court struck down two changes made to the Constitution by the 42nd Amendment Act 1976, declaring them to be violative of the basic structure.
- In the AK Gopalan Case (1950), the Supreme Court contended that there was no violation of Fundamental Rights enshrined in Articles 13, 19, 21 and 22 under the provisions of the Preventive Detention Act if the detention was as per the procedure established by law.
- In the Lily Thomas (2011) case, the Supreme Court ruled that individuals had a right to die with dignity, allowing passive euthanasia with guidelines.
Citing India's Constitution in APA: A Quick Guide
You may want to see also
The Basic Structure Doctrine
The doctrine was formalised in the 1973 Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala case, where the Supreme Court of India ruled that while the Parliament has the authority to amend the Constitution, it cannot change its basic structure. The ruling stated that the Constitution contains certain fundamental features that cannot be altered or destroyed through amendments by the Parliament of India. These features are considered the foundational pillars of the Indian Constitution, and their protection is essential for maintaining the essence of democracy, justice, and equality.
The specific contents of the Basic Structure Doctrine are still debated, but it is widely accepted that it includes secularism, ensuring the state's impartiality in matters of religion, and the federal structure of the Constitution, which balances power between the centre and the states. The doctrine also includes the separation of powers among the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, and the power of judicial review, allowing the judiciary to review the actions of the other branches.
The Dynamic Nature of India's Constitution
You may want to see also
The Shah Bano Begum case
Shah Bano, a Muslim woman, married Mohammed Ahmad Khan, an affluent advocate, in 1932. In 1975, when Shah Bano was 62 years old, she was disowned by her husband and forced to leave her marital home along with her children. Khan provided no financial support for his ex-wife and children. In November 1978, Khan gave an irrevocable talaq (divorce) to Shah Bano, asserting that he was no longer responsible for her maintenance, except for the prescribed period of iddah in Islamic law.
Shah Bano approached the local court for maintenance, and in August 1979, the court directed Khan to pay a sum of ₹25 per month. On a revisional application, the High Court of Madhya Pradesh increased the amount to ₹179.20 per month in July 1980. Khan then appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that he had remarried, which is permitted under Islamic law, and that Shah Bano was no longer his responsibility.
The Supreme Court of India, in its judgement delivered on 23 April 1985, upheld Shah Bano's right to maintenance. The Court invoked Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, stating that it applied to all citizens regardless of their religion. The Court also referred to the Quran, concluding that it imposed an obligation on Muslim husbands to provide maintenance for divorced wives who were unable to support themselves.
The judgement caused controversy and led to the Congress government passing the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. This Act diluted the Supreme Court's judgement and restricted Muslim divorcées' right to alimony from their former husbands to only 90 days after the divorce, aligning with the iddah period in Islamic law. However, in later judgements, the Supreme Court of India interpreted the Act in a way that upheld the validity of the Shah Bano judgement, and the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 was nullified. The Shah Bano case was a significant milestone in the fight for Muslim women's rights in India.
Planning Commission of India: Constitutional or Not?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
The Nabam Rebia case
On December 15, 2015, the Speaker of the Arunachal Pradesh Legislative Assembly, Nabam Rebia, disqualified rebel members of the Legislative Assembly (MLAs) on the grounds of defection. This was done before the Assembly could meet and adopt a resolution to remove Speaker Rebia, which occurred on December 16, 2015. Speaker Rebia challenged his dismissal in the Gauhati High Court, but the court dismissed his plea and stayed the disqualification of the Congress MLAs. The matter was then appealed to the Supreme Court of India.
The Supreme Court identified two key issues in the case. Firstly, it examined the constitutionality of the Governor's decision to advance the Assembly session. Secondly, it considered whether the Speaker could disqualify MLAs while facing a pending motion for his removal. The Court held that the Governor's powers to summon, dissolve, and advance a session are within the scope of judicial review. Additionally, the Court concluded that Speaker Rebia's decision to disqualify the rebel MLAs was an attempt to overcome voting by 'all the then members' and evade his own disqualification.
The Nabam Rebia judgment has had significant implications for Indian politics. It established that a Speaker facing a removal notice is prevented from deciding disqualification pleas against members of the House under the anti-defection law. This judgment has been invoked in subsequent political crises, such as the Maharashtra crisis in 2022, where rival factions within the Shiv Sena party cited the Nabam Rebia ruling to stall disqualification proceedings by seeking the Speaker's removal. The case has also raised complex constitutional questions, leading to ongoing debates and petitions before the Supreme Court.
Understanding Article 35A of the Indian Constitution
You may want to see also
The Minerva Mills case
In India, the Supreme Court (SC) is the highest judicial court and the final court of appeal under the Constitution of India. The SC has the power of judicial review and can annul a law framed by Parliament if it violates the Constitution.
In the Minerva Mills case, the Supreme Court provided key clarifications on the interpretation of the basic structure doctrine. The Court held that the power of Parliament to amend the Constitution is not a power to destroy and that Parliament cannot emasculate the fundamental rights of individuals, including the right to liberty and equality. The Court also upheld the right to alimony for a Muslim woman, declaring that the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is applicable to all citizens irrespective of their religion.
The case is significant because it established the principle that the fundamental rights of individuals are paramount and cannot be overridden by Parliament, even if it is attempting to bring about a socio-economic revolution and create a new socio-economic order. The Court emphasised that it has sworn an oath of allegiance to the Constitution and is accountable to the people of India. It asserted that if the Court is deprived of its power, then the controlled Constitution would become uncontrolled.
The Evolution of India's Constitution
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The Supreme Court of India (SC) is the highest judicial court in India and the final court of appeal under the Constitution of India. It is also the highest constitutional court and has the power of judicial review.
Some examples of constitutional cases heard by the Supreme Court of India include the Kesavananda Bharati Case, the Minerva Mills Case, the Shah Bano Begum Case, the Nabam Rebia case, and the Animal Welfare Board of India v. A. Nagaraja case.
The Kesavananda Bharati case is considered a landmark judgment in Indian constitutional law. The case established the doctrine of the basic structure of the Indian Constitution, which holds that certain fundamental features of the Constitution, such as democracy, secularism, federalism, and the rule of law, cannot be amended or abrogated by Parliament through constitutional amendments.
