Open Access Research Article
INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY
Published Paper
Article Details
INDEPENDENCE OF
JUDICIARY
Government Of The People, By The People, For
The People
AUTHORED BY - E RADHIKA
U.S. president Abraham Lincoln (1809-1865)
The term democracy means “rule by the
people”. “The Judiciary
was to be an armed of the social revolution upholding the equality that Indians
had longed for”. The essence of a federal Constitution is the division of
powers between the Central and State Governments. The division is made by a
written Constitution which is the Supreme Law of the Land. In order to maintain
the supremacy of the Constitution, there must be an independent and impartial
authority to decide the disputes between the Centre and the States or the
States inter-se. Judiciary under Indian Constitution has been given an
independent status. It has been assigned the role of an independent umpire to
guard the constitution and thereby ensure that other branches may not exceed
their powers and function within the constitutional framework. The judiciary is
to interpret the constitution or to adjudicate upon the rights between the
parties concerned.[1]
‘Judiciary’ is an essential wing of
the democracy. The Supreme Court laid down that State should secure the proper
obligation’ as per Article 39A of Constitution of India.[2]Indian
Judiciary is the most powerful judiciary in the world, and next only to that of
USA, continues to command respect and credibility despite delays and
deficiencies, and thus there is a serious obligation cast upon us to secure
that credibility, because the Judiciary is the only hope that a person can look
to for help when his/her human rights are jeopardized.[3]
Indian Constitution has given Judiciary
an Independence status and acted independently. The dynamics of judiciary travelled
beyond the original perceived role of interpreting the law made by the
legislature and extended its tentacles to examine the constitutionality of
actions in administration, implementation of laws, governance of the society
and the life of an individual. The Indian Constitution is not just a piece of
paper or an end which initiates socio-juridical process to allow opportunities
to unfold the full personhood of every human being. Judiciary over a period of
time evolved into a public institution and was working to translate the
Constitutional goals into reality. The functioning of judiciary became a
proactive player in all matters of life of the people of India. The weaknesses,
viz., the inefficiency, colossal corruption, mal administration, lack of political
will of the other two wings- Legislature and Executive- made the Judiciary very
effective and functional. Judiciary under its jural authority safeguard the
interest of the citizens.
An Independent Judiciary is a
national asset. The judiciary is to interpret the constitution or to adjudicate
upon the rights of the parties concerned. The independence of the judiciary has
almost become a corner stone in the theories of justice. The Judiciary should
be impartial, independent and to be independent of external pressures can
protect the rights of the individual and can provide equal justice without fear
and favour. The Judiciary has to declare and interpret the law of the land. The role of the judiciary is to protect
rule of law and to ensure the supremacy of law.
JUDICIAL PROCESS
The judicial process is a set of
interrelated procedures and
roles for deciding disputes by an authoritative person or persons whose
decisions are regularly obeyed. The disputes are to be decided according to a
previously agreed upon set of procedures and in conformity with prescribed rules.
The scope of judicial process expands
according to the political philosophy or political science of the State within
which the judicial power has to function. Judicial power can only be exercised
through lis or actual litigation. The judiciary power unlike other powers in
the State, has to be moved in every individual case. It is moved by actions,
proceedings, writs and methods of judicial review. It enlarged the scope in
financial, industrial, fiscal and taxing areas, labour, economic, technological
spheres and also in administrative laws.
LIMITATIONS ON JUDICIAL POWER
1.
The
judicial power is not concerned with the policy of the law or the statues which
are said to belong to Parliament and Legislatures. The judicial power does not
formulate legislative policy but explains and propounds it by interpretation
and construction. In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India[4], the
Court give interpretation to the meaning of “life and personal liberty’ under
Article 21.
In M.C. Mehta v. Union of
India[5], the
Court extended the scope of Article 21 and 32 of the Constitution of India.
In Kesavananda Bharati v.
State of Kerala[6], the Court
gave Parliament power to amend any part of Constitution of India provided such
amendment do not take away the fundamentals rights of the citizen.
In Indira Gandhi v. Union
of India[7], the
Supreme Court held that clause 4 of 39th amendment as unconstitutional
and void as it was rightly denied of the right to equality enshrined in Article
14.The judges and the courts sometime express the view what the law should be
and in what way the law should be amended, corrected and reformed, that is more
or less by way of obiter dictum and the occasion for saying so is always the
existing difficulties which are presented to the courts and judges in dealing
with the present state of law on a particular point that arises before them for
decision.
2.
Public
movements and public controversies as such are not within the frame of
reference of the judicial power. It can only resolve an actual conflict between
specific litigants and definite parties. It does not deal with the mass or the
mob. It does not decide general public grievances as such, but decides specific
complaints. Advisory jurisdiction is severally limited. But its importance lies
in the fact that it is a new juristic approach about the function of the courts
and judges. It has both critics and supporters.
3.
The
judicial power is exercised ex post facto. It intervenes after the event and
even in quatimet actions, where before the act, the danger in fact appears.
Therefore judicial power is in its nature archaic and not prophetic. It cannot
anticipate. It is powerless to act. It is necessarily occasional in its very
nature and not perpetual in its current.
4.
Judicial
power operates inter parties and acts in
personam and in the very limited spheres such as status and testament
where its voice is in rem, it is at best a personal proclamation and not a
public for general application.
Resjudicata silences parties and their representatives but not those who are
parties.
5.
The
judicial power not only creates law but it is created by it. It is itself the
creature of law and statues and is therefore bound by their terms and
conditions. As a part such law, judicial power is normally bound by its own
precedents and stare decisis.
6.
The
judicial power also accepts the limitations of the well – settled principles of
natural justice and its own machinery and process of discovery, investigation
and evidence to find out truth and justice are inspired by such principles.
7.
The
judicial power is not political power. The judicial power can only act on given
materials and cannot create matter, event, or situation. The political power is
elective and represents the voice of the people. The judicial power is
non-elective and in that sense non- representative and reflects the conscience
and not the voice of the people and acts more as a brake than as the chariot.
INTERNAL CHECKS AND BALANCES IN JUDICIAL POWER
The judicial power is hierarchical
and graded with original, appellate, revisional and superintending powers. It
provides its own checks and balances and the judicial power accepts the
limitations of its self- correcting processes.
JUDICIAL PROCESS AND CONTINUITY OF LIFE
The judicial power lends continuity
of life to the society. Though the judiciary acts as and when occasion arises,
it weaves the texture of continuity of life in State and Society. Neither
Parliament nor legislatures are permanent. They come and go at every General
Election at periodic intervals. The judiciary is permanent. It is the standing
symbol of continuity in the midst of flux. It is the eternal sentinel therefore
of the continuity of life, and the general custodian of law and order in
society. The judiciary is the meeting point of justice in theory and practice.
The judiciary prevents the disruptive forces, both statutory and behavioristic
in State and Society and thus help in the continuity of life and structure.
Statutes are disjointed. They are
disunited. They are often contradictory. They are topical and never thematic.
They are therefore sectional, isolated and never total. It is therefore the
necessary role of the judiciary to interpret and construe the divergent
statutes to render law whole and continuous, by harmonizing contradictions, by
bridging the gaps of isolation and by providing a continuous context and a
consistent theme. Statutes are mere words. The judiciary gives them meaning and
force in their actual impact of life. Parliament and Legislatures breed
statutes but it is the judiciary which has the responsibility of bringing up
and training that young breed into responsible meaningful and effective family
of mature legal adolescents, united to the common purpose of continuous service
and welfare of the State and the Society.
The independence of the judiciary has
almost become a corner stone in the theories of justice. The Judge has to be
independent of external pressures but not impervious to the message and the
mood of the time. The balance between the two is difficult to keep and at the
same time is the very core of the judicial process. He has to hold the balance
between the executive and the legislature. Even within his own field of
judicial progress he has to compose many inconsistencies. The recent tendency
of expecting from the courts and Judges to decide what essentially political
questions are is a new phenomenon in the philosophy and work of the courts. To
a large extent in constitutional interpretation, however undesirable, it may
be, the Judge in the modern age has to face both political overtones and
undertones. The orthodox pattern of lis have broken down to bring in the waves
of public political controversies sur-charged with economic explosives to the
shore of the courts. The judicial decision has become very much more
controversial than what it used to be in the past.
POWER UNDER ARTICLE 142
Recognizing the imperative need for
the establishment of an independent judiciary to promote and protect the
constitutional goals of the judicial review and safeguarding the Rule of Law.
Judges all levels of the judicial
hierarchy, have great discretion, as to how they should decide the case before
them. It has to exercise within the Constitutional norms or the statutory
principles governing.
The Sky is the limit when victims of
injury and injustice. The Supreme Court has Art.142 with a unique amplitude of
residually relief delivery power. We have miles to go and promises to keep if
the new century is to redeem our justice, dignity and the freedom of down
trodden people.[8]
We have upon us the whole armour of
the Constitution and the walk from henceforth in its enlightened ways, wearing
the breastplate of its protecting provisions and flashing the flaming sword of
its inspiration[9]
The State shall take
steps to separate the judiciary from the executive in the public services of
the State[10]. Article
50 has been said to constitute the “conscience of the Constitution”[11].
There are three basic pillars in our constitutional governance i.e., the
Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. Even without the express
provisions of separation of powers between the Legislature, Executive and
Judiciary, the doctrine is an entrenched principle of equality enshrined in
Article 14 of Constitution of India. Independence of Judiciary from the
Executive and Legislature is fundamental to the rule of law and one of the basic
tenets of Indian Constitution. The superior Judiciary is empowered by the
Constitution to declare a law made by the Legislature void if it is found to
have transgressed the Constitutional limitation or if it infringed the rights
enshrined in Part III of the Constitution. Legislature cannot declare any
decision of court of law to be void or of no effect.
It can, however, pass an amending Act to
remedy the defect pointed out by a court of law or on coming to know of it
aliunde. A court’s decision must always bind unless the conditions on which are
so fundamentally altered that the decision could not have been given in the
altered circumstances. If the Legislature has the power over the subject matter
and competence to make a validating law, it can at any time make such a
validating law and make it retrospective. The validity of a validating law,
depends upon the fact whether the Legislature possesses the competence which it
claims over the subject matter and whether in making the validating law, it
removes the defect which the court has found in the existing law. The law
enacted by the Legislature may apparently seem to be within the competence but
yet in substance, if it is shown as an attempt to interfere with the judicial
process, such law may be invalidated being in breach of doctrine of separation
of powers.
Independence of Judiciary
is a part of the basic structure of the Constitution and cannot be permitted to
be adversely impacted by policy making or even by legislative power. The Constitutional
ethos of independent judiciary cannot be permitted to be diluted by acts of
implied intervention or undue interference by the Executive in the impartial
administration of justice, directly or indirectly. For the Judiciary to be
impartial and independent and to serve the constitutional goals, the judge must
act fairly, reasonably, free of fear and favour.
The doctrine of
separation of powers and independence of judiciary, which are the structural
ethos of the Constitution, it is expected that the legislative power and more
particularly the subordinate power ought not to be exercised so as to obstruct
these basic fundamental principles. The exercise of subordinate legislative
power, which by means necessary implication, encroaches upon the Independence
of Judiciary would have to be declared on the touch stone of it being violative
or otherwise if the basic structure.[12]
The Independence of
Judiciary is one of the significant features of the Constitution. Any policy or
decision of the Government which would undermine or destroy the independence of
Judiciary would not only be opposed to public policy, but also upon the basic
structure of the Constitution. The State policies should neither defeat nor
cause impediment in the discharge of judicial functions. The domain of judicial
field are to be discharged by judiciary and that too effectively.
It is the constitutional
duty of the Supreme Court to ensure maintenance of the independence of
judiciary as well as the effectiveness of the justice delivery system in the
country. In India there is no strict separation of power of Governmental
powers. The Court possesses the power as a matter of Constitutional mandate.
The court is the guardian of powers.
In Fenn Walter v. Union
of India[13],
in this case Supreme Court considered the question regarding the circumstances
under which a sitting judge of a High Court could be appointed as Commission or
as Tribunal, since such appointment is likely to affect the independence of
judiciary.
In UOI v. Delhi High
Court [14], the
Delhi High Court held that Recovery of debts Due to Banks and Financial
Institution Act 1993 was unconstitutional because it eroded the independence of
judiciary by curtailing the jurisdiction of the civil courts because the High
Court had no role to play in the appointment of Presiding Officers. Reversing
the decision Supreme Court said that there is no reason to presume that
Tribunals appointed under Arts.323-A and 323-B would not be independent or that
the independence of the Judiciary would stand eroded particularly when the
Presiding Officers were required to be qualified to be judges and all decisions
were subject to judicial review.
In our Constitution, three wings of
Government are enshrined, and each of these three wings of Government has to
work independently in spite of the fact that they are inter connected with each
other. Justice Krishan Iyer observed for distinction that judiciary has to draw
the line between individual liberty and social control. The objective of
justice is deeply enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution of India
In S.P. Gupta Vs Union of India[15],
the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court held that;
Judges should be of stern stuff and tough fibre, unbending before power, economic or political, and they must uphold the core principle of the rule of law which says Be you ever so high, the law is above you. This is the principle of independence of the judiciary which is vital for the establishment of real participatory democracy, maintenance of the rule of law as a dynamic concept and delivery of social justice to the vulnerable sections of the community. It is this principle of independence of the judiciary which we roust keep in mind while interpreting the relevant provisions of the Constitution
Judges should be of stern stuff and tough fibre, unbending before power, economic or political, and they must uphold the core principle of the rule of law which says Be you ever so high, the law is above you. This is the principle of independence of the judiciary which is vital for the establishment of real participatory democracy, maintenance of the rule of law as a dynamic concept and delivery of social justice to the vulnerable sections of the community. It is this principle of independence of the judiciary which we roust keep in mind while interpreting the relevant provisions of the Constitution
In Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record
Association & Anr. Vs Union of India[16]
declared:
Independence of Judiciary is the sine qua non of democracy. So long as the Judiciary remains truly distinct from both the Legislature and the Executive, the general power of the people can never be endangered from any quarters. Montesquieu in his book Spirit of Laws observed there is no liberty, if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and the Executive powers.
Independence of Judiciary is the sine qua non of democracy. So long as the Judiciary remains truly distinct from both the Legislature and the Executive, the general power of the people can never be endangered from any quarters. Montesquieu in his book Spirit of Laws observed there is no liberty, if the power of judging be not separated from the legislative and the Executive powers.
An Independent Judiciary is a
national asset. The progress of the society is dependent upon the proper
application of to its needs. In the case of I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab,
the Supreme Court ruled that Art 368 of the Constitution only provided for the
procedure to amend the Constitution and was not to be construed as any
independent source of power. It was opined that the amendment to the
Constitution made by the Parliament could not encroach upon Fundamental rights
and if they did so the amendments had to be declared void by reason of Art
13(2) of the Constitution.
Constitutional evolution by the
judiciary, Article 21 came to protect a wide range of interests covering almost
every field of human life. In Madhav Hoskots case[17],
it was held that providing free legal service to the poor and needy was an
essential element of the ‘reasonable, fair and just procedure’.
In Hussainara Khatoons[18]
case, while considering the plight of the under trial in jail, speedy trial was
held to be an integral and essential part of the ‘right to life and liberty’
contained in Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
In Nandini Satpathy v. P.L.Dani[19],
The Supreme Court held that an accused has the right to consult a lawyer during
interrogation and that the right not to make self-incriminatory statements
should be widely interpreted to cover the pretrial stage also.
In Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra[20],The
Supreme Court laid down certain safeguards for arrested persons.
In Bandhu Mukthi Morchas [21]case,
the Supreme Court held that right to life guaranteed by Article 21 included the
right to live with human dignity, free from exploitation.
In Bihar Legal Support Society v. The
Chief Justice of India and others[22],
in this case the court was concerned about the underprivileged and poor
sections of the society.
In Charles Sobraj v. Supdt., Central
Jail[23],the
right not to be held in fetters.
In T.V. Vatheeswaran v. State of
Tamil Nadu[24],the
right against handcuffing.
In Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa[25],
the right against custodial violence.
In O.K.Basu v. State of West Bengal[26],
the rights of the arrested person.
In Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan[27],
the right of the female employee not to be sexually harassed at the place of work.
In Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar[28],
the right to pollution free water and air is also a facet of Article 21.
The Court has expanded the ambit and
scope of Article 21 so as to include within its fold the right to live with
human dignity.
In Nilabati Behera v. State of Orissa[29],
in this case the court mounts the relief by granting compensation in
proceedings under article 32 or226 of the constitution seeking enforcement or
protection of fundamental right it does so under the public law by way of
penalizing the wrong doer and fixing the liability for the public wrong on the
state which has failed in its public duty the fundamental rights of the
citizen.
Access to justice to protect their fundamental
rights was almost illusory for the weaker sections of Indian humanity due to
their poverty, ignorance and illiteracy. To them, rights and benefits confirmed
by the constitution meant nothing. Because of their handicapped, their lacked
capacity to assert their rights. Thus, majority of the people of our country
were subjected to denial of justice. The judiciary regarded it as its duty to
come to the rescue of the under privileged to help them to reap the benefits of
economic and social entitlements. The strategy of public interest litigation
was evolved to bring justice within the reach of the under privileged classes.
JUDICIAL
REVIEW
It is the power
exerted by the courts of a country to examine the actions of the legislatures,
executive and administrative arms of government and to ensure that such actions
conform to the provisions of the nation’s Constitution. It has two important
functions, like, of legitimizing government action and the protection of
constitution against any undue encroachment by the government. It is the interpretational and observer roles of the Indian judiciary. Suo
Moto cases and with the discontinuation of the principle of Locus Standi, have
allowed the judiciary to intervene in many public issues, even when there is no
complaint from the aggrieved party.
JUDICIAL
REVIEW AND CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS
There is no direct and express provision in the
constitution empowering the courts to invalidate laws, but the constitution has
imposed definite limitations upon each of the organs, the transgression of
which would make the law void. The court is entrusted with the task of deciding
whether any of the constitutional limitations has been transgressed or not.
Some provisions in the constitution supporting the
process of judicial review are:
Article 372 (1) establishes the judicial review of
the pre-constitution legislation.
Article 13 declares that any law which contravenes
any of the provisions of the part of Fundamental Rights shall be void.
Articles 32 and 226 entrusts the roles of the
protector and guarantor of fundamental rights to the Supreme and High Courts.
Article 251 and 254 states that in case of
inconsistency between union and state laws, the state law shall be void.
Article 246 (3) ensures the state legislature’s
exclusive powers on matters pertaining to the State List.
Article 245 states that the powers of both
Parliament and State legislatures are subject to the provisions of the
constitution.
Articles 131-136 entrusts the court with the power
to adjudicate disputes between individuals, between individuals and the state,
between the states and the union; but the court may be required to interpret
the provisions of the constitution and the interpretation given by the Supreme
Court becomes the law honoured by all courts of the land.
Article 137 gives a special power to the SC to
review any judgment pronounced or order made by it. An order passed in a
criminal case can be reviewed and set aside only if there are errors apparent
on the record.
POWER OF JUDICIAL REVIEW
The constitution divides power
between different organs and prescribes limitations on the power of parliament,
the state legislature and the executive, it also provides for an impartial
umpire in the shape of an independent judiciary to resolve the inevitable
disputes over the boundaries of constitutional power which arise in the process
of government. The founding fathers entrusted this power of judicial review
exclusively to the judiciary.it is not generally appreciated that when a court
invalidates legislation, it neither approves nor condemns any legislative
policy, nor is it concerned with its wisdom or expediency. It merely determines
whether the legislation is in conformity worth or contrary to the provision of
the constitution. when the court strikes down the an executive orders, it does
so not in a sprit of confrontation auto assert
its superiority but in discharge of its constitutional duties and the
majesty of the law. Likewise, when it upholds legislation or vindicates the
executive, the court does not play a second fiddle to the Government. In all
those cases, the court discharges its duty as a judicial sentinel, guarding the
Ark of the Constitution. The courts do not interfere with the policy matters of
the executive unless the policy is either against the Constitution or some
statue or is actuated by malafide.
Where the executive refuses to carry
out the legislative will or ignores or thwarts the legislative will, it is
surely legitimate for courts to step in and ensure compliance with the
legislative mandate. Judiciary is always moved by an aggrieved person when the
traditional routes have failed.
Judicial activism encompasses an area
of legislative vacuum in the field of human rights. Judicial activism
reinforces the strength of democracy and reaffirms the faith of the public in
the Rule of Law. If the judiciary was also to shut its door to the citizen who
finds the Legislatures as not responding and executive indifferent, the citizen
would take to the streets and that would be bad both for the Rule of Law and
democratic functioning of the society.
CHALLENGES
(I)THE NEED FOR RESTRAINT AND CAUTION
Judicial activism and judicial
restraint are two sides of the same coin It is essential that judicial
restraint in the exercise of its functions is of equal importance for the
judiciary while discharging its judicial obligations under the Constitution. The
decisions of the courts should be within the limits of judicial legitimacy.
Judiciary casts a great obligation to defend the values of the Constitution and
the rights of Indians. The judiciary can act only as an Alarm clock and not as
a time keeper.
(II) ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY
Rule of law sustained democracy and
independent judiciary is assigned the task of mainitaing Rule of Law. The
impartiality and independence of the judiciary depends on the high standards of
conduct followed by judges. the courts act for the people who have reposed
confidence in them and therefore the greatest threat to the independence of the
judiciary is the erosion of credibility of the judiciary in public mind, for
whatever reasons.
(III) SPEEDY JUSTICE
One of the greatest challenges is the
failure of judiciary to deliver justice expeditiously. Many attempts at
improvement of the situation have been made but there is no denying fact that
this continues to remain the central challenge facing the Indian judiciary. The
lack of a speedy dispute resolution system has a direct impact on the level of
lawlessness in our society.
(IV)THE CHALLENGE OF EXPENSIVE
JUSTICE
The poor, backward and weaker
sections of the society do it feel that they have equal opportunities for
securing justice because of their socio-economic conditions. The Government has
demonstrated its bonafide and resolve in that behalf by enforcing and
supporting Legal Services Authorities Act, aims at providing a protective
umbrella to the weaker sections of the society, against all injustices and
giving it adequate funds. National Legal Services Authority is introducing
various schemes to ensure speedy and inexpensive justice to the poor and the
down trodden people.
(V) ADMINISTRATION OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE
The administration of criminal
justice appears to be at cross roads. Large scale acquittals are eroding
people’s confidence in the effectiveness of criminal justice system. When
people see persons accused of heinous and ghastly offences getting acquitted,
they believe that either the courts are too liberal or pro criminal or are not
functioning the way they ought to function. The courts must respond to the
society’s cry for justice and punish the guilty by a proper and judicious
approach to assess the evidence.
CONCLUSION
Judiciary was not at all meant to
give to it a supreme status as compared to the other co “ordinate organs.
Judiciary is to act as a watchdog to oversee and prods to keep the other organs
with in the constitutional bounds. Only an impartial and independent judiciary
can protect the rights of the individual and can provide equal justice without
fear and favour. Judicial independence is a prerequisite for every judge whose
oath of office requires him to act without fear or favour, affection of
ill-will and to uphold the Constitution and laws of the country. There are many
constitutional and institutional devices to sear the independence of the
judiciary, such as life tenure or tenure for good behavior, and non-votible and
times of service and contempt procedures.
The courts act
as a custodian of the fundamental rights. The growing functions of the modern
state, judicial intervention in the process of making administrative decisions
and executing them has also increased.If the
judiciary surpasses the line of the powers set for it in the name of judicial
activism, it could be rightly said that the judiciary then begins to invalidate
the concept of separation of powers set out in the Constitution.The legislature function and duty is making of laws, to fill the gap of
laws and to implement them in a proper manner is responsibility of the
executive. So that the only work remaining for the judiciary is
interpretations. Only a fine equilibrium between these government bodies can
sustain the constitutional values.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Constitutional Law of India by Dr. J.
N. Pandey Central Law Agency
Law and Development in Latin America:
A Case Book by Kenneth L Karst, Kenneth L.
Karst, Keith S. Rosenn.
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM IN
INDIA by S.P.SATHE
THE INDIAN
CONSTITUTION CORNER STONE OF A NATION by GRANVILLE AUSTIN.
WEBSTER on
INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY.
CONSTITUTIONAL AND
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW by A.W.BRADLEY AND K.D.EWING 13th edition.
www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-35-doctrine-of-separation-of-powers.html
Encyclopedia .com
[1]Sir A.K. Aiyar, who was one of the
framers of the constitution
[2]Kartarsingh V/s State of Punjab
(1994)3SCC569
[3]T.R. Andhyarujina , Judicial
Accountability: India’s Methods and Experience, Judges and Judicial
Accountability”, Cyrus Das, K.Chandra, 2004,PP101-130
[8] Justice V.R.Krishna Iyer, the
Majesty of the Judiciary, Universal Law Publishing Co., Delhi, 2007.
[9]Virendra Singh v. State of UP AIR
1954 SC 447 at Page 454.
[11] Union of India v. Sankalchand, AIR
1977 SC 2328.
[12] Minister of Health and welfare,
Maharashtra v. S.C. Malte, (2012) 13 SCC 118: (2012) 12 SCALE 480.
Article Information
INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY
Authors: E RADHIKA
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2024/02/13
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.