Integrated Judicial System in India shyam institute

* Integrated Judicial System in India *

President

Supreme Court

High Court

District & Sessions Courts

Subordinate Courts
(Civil)

Subordinate Magistrate Courts

Judicial Magistrate Courts

Metropolitan Areas

Metropolitan Magistrate Courts
(Criminal)

City - Civil & Sessions Courts

Presidency Small Causes Courts

Panchayat Courts

Executive Magistrate Courts

• * The body that determines the number of Supreme Court judges - Parliament
• * The body that determines the number of High Court judges - President
• * The body that determines the powers of the High Court - Parliament
• * The body that establishes Joint High Courts - Parliament
• * The body that establishes High Court benches - Parliament
• * The body that establishes new High Courts - Parliament
• * The body that determines the salaries of Supreme Court and High Court judges - Parliament
• * The body that establishes special High Courts in Union Territories - Parliament
• * According to Article 241, special High Courts can be established in Union Territories.
• * Special High Courts were established in Delhi in 1996.
• * Delhi is the only Union Territory with a special High Court.

Public Interest Litigation (PIL)

• * Country where it originated - America
• * The period when it came into practice in India - 1980s
• * Supreme Court judges who brought it into use in India:
  1. 1. P. N. Bhagwati
  2. 2. V.R. Krishna Iyer
• * Other names: Social Action Litigation, Social Interest Litigation
• * Through this, constitutional validity and constitutional orders cannot be questioned.

Main objectives of PIL:

1. To ensure that judicial orders are properly implemented.
2. To effectively deliver justice to socially and economically backward sections of society.
3. To ensure fundamental rights are effectively implemented.

• * Until then, anyone who felt their rights were violated had the tradition of going to court. This was termed Locus Standi. PIL broke this tradition.
• * PIL can be filed on behalf of those who have been wronged, for the poor, for the neglected.
• * PIL provides an opportunity for any person belonging to the public to go to court for the rights of others for public benefit.
• * Supreme Court described PIL as a judicial action devised to ensure justice in the court for the sections of society who are denied justice and neglected.
• * Public Interest Litigation is to ensure that the law is properly and comprehensively implemented, and that complete justice is available to all, and that constitutional objectives are achieved.

Main aspects in PIL:

1. Public Interest Litigation is a social weapon for the movement for legal aid. Its main objective is to bring justice within reach of poor people who are not even eligible for humanitarian aid.
2. Public Interest Litigation is different and distinct from ordinary, traditional litigation. In this, the plaintiff is the one seeking liberation or justice from the defendant, while the defendant is the one who denies them that.
3. The purpose behind bringing this PIL is not just to fulfill the interest of one person or to do justice. For the benefit of a class or broader public interest.
4. PIL's main demand is that constitutional rights and justice should reach those who are socially, economically backward, poor, and neglected.
5. The impact of PIL falls on the petitioner along with the government or government bodies, courts. It provides social justice to the backward classes.
6. PILs are taken up for hearing to protect the social and economic interests of the people, for the welfare of the backward, for broader interests, and for the collective needs of the people.
7. In the matter of Public Interest Litigation, courts take decisions with a positive attitude towards the people, not following traditional procedures. It adopts a creative approach that thinks about the people, not strictly.
8. In PIL cases, courts show a flexible approach and follow all principles and regulations of the judicial system. Whatever procedures are followed, they are within the jurisdiction of the judicial system.
9. Unlike traditional petitions, there is no possibility of injustice to any person or punishment of any person in these.

Scope of Public Interest Litigation:

• * In 1988, the Supreme Court formulated a procedure to hear letters or petitions that come under Public Interest Litigation. This procedure was revised once in 1993 and again in 2003.
• * According to the procedure, these (below) are generally accepted for hearing:

1. Matters of contract labor.
2. Matters of neglected children.
3. Complaints arising from non-payment of minimum wages to workers, non-compliance of regulations to casual workers, violation of labor laws, etc.
4. Matters of pre-release, after serving 14 years of life imprisonment, matters such as release on personal bail, suspicious deaths in jails, violations of fundamental rights such as delay in trial.
5. Cases of suspicious deaths in police custody, police harassment, matters such as police refusal to register cases.
6. Crimes against women, rapes, murders, kidnappings, dowry harassment, dowry deaths, harassment of ordinary women.
7. Cases of harassment by others or police against SCs, STs, economically backward people.
8. Environmental pollutants, behaviors that disrupt environmental balance, prohibited drugs, adulterated food items, protection of historical and cultural structures, protection of forests, public issues or matters such as wildlife conservation.

Matters not falling under the scope of Public Interest Litigation:

1. a) Landlord, tenant, or tenant disputes.
2. b) Service matters related to pension, (gratuity payments.
3. c) Complaints against central, state governments, government bodies, local bodies in other matters except the above-mentioned items that fall under jurisdiction.
4. d) Admission matters of medical education or other educational institutions.
5. e) Cases pending in High Court or other lower courts.

Principles formulated by the Supreme Court regarding Public Interest Litigation:

• * When any person files a petition on behalf of helpless people who are wronged and unable to knock on the court door, the court may initiate an inquiry with the authority vested under Articles 32, 226 of the Constitution.
• * In matters of fundamental rights not reaching the victims, the court, with constitutional responsibility, responds and directs the concerned governments to implement the constitution and provide justice to them.

• * When governments fail to implement constitutional dharma, and to act accordingly, and when contradictions arise between the protection of the fundamental rights of the vast public and matters of public importance, the court considers even a telegram or a small letter received regarding them as a petition. In that matter, the court adopts a somewhat flexible approach towards the rules.
• * When the court feels that injustice has been done to a large number of people, it does not hesitate to invoke Articles 14, 21 of the Constitution. Similarly, it also brings into force the principles formed by international platforms on human rights.
• * When the constitutional rights of the poor, illiterate, backward, wronged, and helpless are not available, and when they feel they are facing legal discrimination, the court relaxes the generally existing locus standi rule and comes forward to do justice to the victims.
• * When the court comes to a preliminary conclusion that the oppressed people are not getting constitutional rights, it overrules the objections raised by the governments on the petitions and proceeds with the inquiry.
• * Even though PIL also has to conduct inquiries following legal regulations, the court makes decisions considering the matter related to that petition, the facts related to it, and the circumstances.
• * If a dispute arises between two groups on a private matter, the court does not agree to bring it under the purview of PIL.

• * If a person has privately filed a case in any lower court regarding injustice to them, and if that matter is of broader scope, higher or supreme courts may directly intervene and take up the inquiry.
• * The court has the power to appoint a commission to find out the facts in any matter as part of the PIL inquiry.
• * The inquiry commission appointed by the court also has the possibility to involve government body management.
• * While issuing orders for public benefit, the court acts cautiously regarding changes in policies that are already decided and being implemented.
• * With utmost care, taking into account all types of aspects, it gives a verdict in a way that does not violate the fundamental rights of the people.
• * Usually, the court does not cross its jurisdiction, forgetting the powers related to judicial review.
• * Even though courts have the power to issue orders to do full justice to the victims, there are some limitations as per Article 142 of the Constitution.
• * No petition that questions the Constitution, constitutional legitimacy, constitutional orders will be taken up by the court under PIL.

Judicial Activism:

• * Country where this concept originated - America
• * The one who first used this term - Arthur Schlesinger in 1947 Jr.
• * The period when this concept became popular in India - 1979 decade
• * Those who laid the foundation for this concept in India:
  1. 1. P. N. Bhagwati
  2. 2. V. Krishna Iyer
  3. 3. Chinnappa Reddy
  4. 4. D.A. Desai.

Meaning of Judicial Activism:

• * Judicial activism showed the active role played by the judiciary in protecting the rights of citizens.
• * In other words, the judiciary played a catalytic role in ensuring that the two key branches of government, namely, the legislature and the executive branch, fulfill their constitutional responsibilities.
• * Judicial activism means a dynamic judicial system. Judicial activism helps the judiciary to move from a state of restraint to an active state and to reach a situation of acting dynamically.

Judicial Activism was defined (in the following way):

• * Judicial activism is the process of reminding judges of their powers in the direction of behaving favorably towards social welfare policies, moving away from the traditional rigid rule-to-rule method. All the decisions it takes should be in a way that improves society.
• * In some cases, situations arose where the government and legislatures had to intervene.
• * Judicial activism is part of opposing or repealing decisions that are against constitutional provisions, (protecting the rights granted to the people, and ensuring that they are implemented more effectively.
• * Public Interest Litigation is also related to judicial activism.
• * Starting Public Interest Litigation and implementing it effectively is part of Supreme Court's judicial activism.
• * Public Interest Litigation can be cited as a prototype for judicial activism.

Judicial Activism - Impact:

• * Increased the scope of rights to know about the administrative process.
• * Increased the number of representatives without limitation.
• * Increased judicial control over discretionary powers.
• * Expanded the judiciary to all administrative matters.

Factors Contributing to the Increase of Judicial Activism:

1. Civil Rights Activists (PUCL): Primarily work on civil rights, (PUCL) political rights.
2. Public Rights Activists (PUDR): People dissatisfied with the government participate in movements (PUDR) and fight for social, economic rights.
3. Consumer Rights Groups: Fights for the rights that consumers deserve according to the law.
4. Bonded Labor Abolition: Bonded Labor Abolition fights for the rights that consumers deserve according to the law. Group demanded the judiciary to act actively (Group) in abolishing bonded labor system.
5. Environmental Protection: Environmental protection groups brought pressure on the judiciary to protect the environment from pollution.
6. Irrigation Project Opposition: Many innocent people are displaced due to large irrigation projects. Therefore, they tried to fight through the judiciary to look for alternatives. Example: Medha Patkar
7. Child Rights Protection: Groups fighting against the exploitation and discrimination faced by children approached the judiciary for laws.
8. Rights of Prisoners in Custody: Groups fighting for the rights of prisoners in custody demanded that prisoners in custody should be interrogated according to the law, violence should not be used, and fought against lock-up deaths. Many times brought the matter to the attention of the judiciary.
9. Rights of the Poor (Groups): Groups working for the rights of urban poor, drought-stricken area poor have launched movements. Example: Common Cause Organization
10. Discrimination Victims Rights: Groups fought for recognition and justice as per Schedules 5, 6 of the Constitution for Discrimination Victims Rights (Groups). Example: Samata Organization
11. Women Rights Groups: Women Rights Groups fought against gender discrimination and to prevent harassment and atrocities against women. Example: Brigade Math, Bharatiya Muslim Andolan Sanghas
12. Bar Association (Groups): Bar Association (Groups) are campaigning demanding accountability and self-governance to the judicial system.
13. Media (Groups): Media (Groups) are demanding that the media should function independently and that mass media under government control should be accountable.
14. Some Lawyers Groups: Some prominent lawyers, as a group, are fighting together with various demands.
15. Some Petitioners Groups: Many groups used to act as petitioners while being activists for Petitioners Groups. Example: Teesta Setalvad, MC Mehta

Adverse Effects due to Judicial Activism:

• * Some have expressed concerns that when judicial activism exceeds its limits, the rights of legislatures, government, and administrative machinery may also be infringed. Some are behaving in a way that influences judges with unnecessary fears.

a) Theoretical Fears:

• Fear that legislative bodies, government, and non-governmental organizations' powers will be suppressed.

b) Intellectual Fears:

• Intellectual Fears: Arun Jaitley, well-known economic principles, do these judges know? Science researches in research centers, are their needs, consequences understandable to them? was questioned.

c) Management Fears:

• Management Fears: Expressing concern that these courts are obstructing the development that is happening with unnecessary interference.

d) Legal Fears:

• Legal Fears: Will they respect laws? Will they recognize democracy? Questions like these.