Article 145 of the Indian Constitution is a pivotal provision that grants the Supreme Court of India the power to regulate its own practice and procedure. This autonomy is essential for the effective and efficient functioning of the apex court, allowing it to manage its workload and judicial processes according to its needs, while also ensuring fairness and transparency in its proceedings.
This article outlines not only the general rule-making power but also specifies certain mandatory requirements related to the composition of Benches for specific types of cases and the manner of delivering judgments, thereby laying down fundamental procedural principles for the highest court of the land.
Original Text
- Rules of Court, etc.
(1) 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 including— (a) rules as to the persons practising before the Court; (b) rules as to the procedure for hearing appeals and other matters pertaining to appeals including the time within which appeals to the Court are to be entered; (c) rules as to the proceedings in the Court in relation to the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III; (d) rules as to the entertainment of appeals under sub-clause (c) of clause (1) of article 134; (e) rules as to the conditions subject to which any judgment pronounced or order made by the Court may be reviewed and the procedure for such review including the time within which applications to the Court for such review are to be entered; (f) rules as to the costs of and incidental to any proceedings in the Court and as to the fees to be charged in respect thereof; (g) rules as to the granting of bail; (h) rules as to stay of proceedings; (i) rules for the summar y determination of any appeal which appears to the Court to be frivolous or vexatious or brought for the purpose of delay; (j) rules as to the proceedings for the committal of any person or court for contempt of the Court;
(2) Subject to the provisions of clause (3), rules made under this article may fix the minimum number of Judges who are to sit for any purpose, and may provide for the powers of single Judges and Benches of Judges;
(3) The minimum number of Judges who are to sit for the purpose of deciding any case involving a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of this Constitution or for the purpose of hearing any reference under article 143 shall be five:
Provided that, where the Court while hearing an appeal under any of the provisions of this Chapter considers that the case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of this Constitution the Court may refer the case to a Bench of five Judges for decision of such question and the Court may in a suitable case direct that the whole case shall be re-heard by such a Bench.
(4) No judgment shall be delivered by the Supreme Court save in open court, and no report shall be made under article 143 save in accordance with an opinion delivered in open court.
(5) No judgment and no such opinion shall be delivered by the Supreme Court save with the concurrence of a majority of the Judges present at the hearing of the case, but nothing in this clause shall be deemed to prevent a Judge who does not concur from delivering a dissenting judgment or opinion.
Detailed Explanation
Article 145 vests in the Supreme Court the authority to frame rules governing its own operations. This rule-making power, however, is not absolute but is subject to certain conditions and limitations defined within the article itself.
Clause (1) is the primary source of this power. It states that the Supreme Court may, with the approval of the President, make rules to regulate its practice and procedure. This power is also subject to any law made by Parliament. This means that while the Court has autonomy in procedural matters, Parliament retains the legislative power to enact laws that might impact the Court’s procedure, and such laws would override the Court’s rules if there’s a conflict. The clause then provides an illustrative list of matters that the rules can cover, such as rules concerning advocates practicing before the Court, the procedure for hearing appeals, proceedings related to fundamental rights enforcement, conditions for review petitions, costs and fees, granting of bail, stay of proceedings, summary dismissal of frivolous appeals, and proceedings for contempt of court. This list is not exhaustive but covers the critical aspects of judicial administration and procedure. The requirement of Presidential approval ensures a check on the Court’s procedural autonomy, linking it loosely to the executive branch, though this approval is typically procedural and granted on the advice of the government.
Clause (2) allows the rules made under Article 145 to specify the minimum number of judges required to sit for different purposes. This provides the Court with the flexibility to constitute benches of appropriate strength depending on the nature and complexity of the case. It also permits rules to define the powers of single judges and various benches (e.g., Division Bench, Full Bench).
Clause (3) carves out a mandatory requirement regarding the strength of benches for specific types of cases. It mandates that a minimum of five judges must sit for the purpose of deciding any case that involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution, or for hearing any reference made under Article 143 (Advisory Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court by the President). This minimum quorum of five judges is commonly referred to as the Constitution Bench. The proviso to this clause adds flexibility, allowing a smaller bench hearing an appeal to refer a case to a five-judge bench if it finds that the case involves a substantial question of constitutional interpretation. The smaller bench may also direct that the entire case be re-heard by the larger bench. This ensures that significant constitutional matters are decided by a sufficiently strong bench, lending greater authority and stability to the judgments.
Clause (4) stipulates that all judgments and opinions delivered by the Supreme Court must be pronounced in open court. This provision is aimed at ensuring transparency in the judicial process and public access to the Court’s decisions. It prevents judgments or opinions from being delivered in secrecy.
Clause (5) addresses the manner of arriving at and delivering judgments. It states that judgments or opinions are to be delivered with the concurrence of a majority of the judges present at the hearing. This establishes the principle of majority decision-making in multi-judge benches. However, it explicitly preserves the right of any judge who does not concur with the majority to deliver a dissenting judgment or opinion. This recognizes the importance of individual judicial opinion and contributes to the evolution of law by articulating alternative perspectives.
Detailed Notes
- Source of Power: Grants the Supreme Court the power to make rules regulating its practice and procedure.
- Approving Authority: Rules require the approval of the President of India.
- Supremacy of Law: Rule-making power is subject to any law made by Parliament. Parliamentary law overrides SC rules if there’s a conflict.
- Scope of Rules (Illustrative List):
- Persons practicing before the Court (Advocates).
- Procedure for hearing appeals (including time limits).
- Proceedings for enforcing Fundamental Rights (Part III).
- Entertainment of specific appeals (Art 134(1)(c)).
- Review of judgments/orders (conditions, procedure, time limits).
- Costs and fees in proceedings.
- Granting of bail.
- Stay of proceedings.
- Summary dismissal of frivolous/vexatious appeals.
- Contempt of court proceedings.
- Bench Strength (Clause 2): Rules can fix the minimum number of judges for any purpose.
- Powers of Judges: Rules can define powers of single judges and Benches.
- Mandatory Quorum (Clause 3):
- Minimum number of judges for specific cases is five.
- These cases are:
- Involving a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution.
- Hearing any reference under Article 143 (Advisory Jurisdiction).
- Bench of five or more judges is known as a “Constitution Bench”.
- A smaller bench hearing an appeal can refer constitutional interpretation questions to a five-judge bench.
- Judgment Delivery (Clause 4):
- Judgments and opinions under Article 143 must be delivered only in open court.
- Ensures transparency and public access.
- Decision Making & Opinions (Clause 5):
- Decisions are based on the concurrence of a majority of judges present at the hearing.
- Any judge who does not concur has the right to deliver a separate dissenting judgment or opinion.
Additional Comments
- The rules framed by the Supreme Court under this article are known as the “Supreme Court Rules”. These rules govern everything from filing procedures to court holidays.
- The requirement of President’s approval is a unique feature, making the SC’s procedural autonomy subject to executive assent, though it is usually a formality.
- The supremacy of parliamentary law over the SC’s procedural rules highlights the constitutional principle of parliamentary sovereignty in matters of law-making, while preserving judicial independence in adjudication.
- The mandatory quorum of five judges for constitutional matters (Constitution Bench) is crucial for ensuring that authoritative pronouncements on the interpretation of the Constitution are made by a sufficiently large and representative bench, contributing to stability and consistency in constitutional law.
- The right to deliver dissenting opinions is a cornerstone of judicial deliberation, allowing for the articulation of minority views that can influence future legal development and jurisprudence.
Summary
Article 145 empowers the Supreme Court to establish rules for its own practice and procedure, subject to parliamentary law and the President’s approval. These rules cover a wide range of matters including advocates, appeals, fundamental rights enforcement, review petitions, costs, and contempt proceedings. The article mandates a minimum bench strength of five judges (Constitution Bench) for cases involving substantial questions of constitutional interpretation and references under Article 143. It also requires judgments and opinions to be delivered in open court based on the majority view, while expressly permitting judges to deliver dissenting opinions.