Follow Us
By Satya Prakash
As the Judiciary faces the uphill task of huge pendency and comes under criticism for allegedly being an elitist institution, two constitutional functionaries have suggested structural changes to make it more people-friendly.
While Vice President M Venkaiah Naidu has advocated setting up zonal benches of the Supreme Court to bring the judicial system closer to people, Attorney General KK Venugopal suggested creating courts of appeals between the Supreme Court and high courts in four regions.
Speaking at the Independence Day celebrations at the Supreme Court in the presence of Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and Law Minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, Venugopal favoured setting up of four courts of appeal in four regions. He said judges from High Courts can be elevated to courts of appeal through the same process by which collegium appoints judges.
The Attorney General said dozens of civil appeals were pending for 12 years. “Just imagine such cases are also pending in High Courts and district courts, may be for nine or 10 years. We require a bold person today to address the court system in our country,” he said, adding as far as litigants were concerned, the court of appeal should be closer to them.
Incidentally, the Congress had in its poll manifesto favoured establishment of courts of appeal which would sit in multiple Benches of three judges each in six locations to hear appeals from judgments and orders of high courts. The party had said the Constitution should be amended to make the Supreme Court a Constitutional Court that will hear and decide cases involving the interpretation of the Constitution and other cases of legal significance or national importance.
Touted as the most powerful court in the world, the Indian Supreme Court’s jurisdiction is wider than that of any Federal Supreme Court. It has original jurisdiction in disputes between the Union and the States, between the States inter se and original jurisdiction under article 32 of the Constitution for the protection of fundamental rights. It’s the highest court of civil and criminal appeal and has overriding powers to grant special leave to appeal from any judgment, decree, determination, sentence or order in any cause or matter passed or made by any court or tribunal in India. Besides, it has advisory jurisdiction under article 143 of the Constitution.
As a result, the Supreme Court ends up dealing with issues ranging from divorce, maintenance and child custody to frivolous PILs while dozens of Constitution Bench matters having far-reaching implications for economy, polity and society remain pending.
It’s not that it’s an untested idea. The System of Court of Appeal is already functional in South Africa and Canada where the Supreme Court deals with only constitutional issues. If it’s replicated in India, the courts of appeal would become the final court of appeal.
“No further appeal will lie other than the review at the same court. The judges at the Supreme Court will not have to burn midnight oil in dealing with these cases.... This will lessen the burden of the lawyers and the judges. It will be a new beginning,” said Venugopal.
Despite the increase in number of judges in the Supreme Court from eight (including the CJI) in 1950 to 31 in 2009, the pendency has touched almost 60,000. Given the magnitude of the problem, the recent amendment to increase it to 34 judges won’t help much.
Parliamentary Standing Committee on Law and Justice has in the past suggested setting up zonal benches of the Supreme Court. The Law Commission too had in 2009 recommended it along with a permanent Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court to make it accessible to people living in remote areas, but the Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected such suggestions citing its institutional integrity.
So, is it time to experiment with the idea of courts of appeal? Maintaining that the government and the judges have failed to ensure expeditious delivery of justice, the Attorney General said if the new system of courts of appeal was implemented, the Supreme Court and the courts of appeal will have pendency of only two years.
Experience of the last seven decades compels us to think of this structural change to decentralise the justice delivery system making it accessible to common man. This proposed reform also promises to give due importance to vital constitutional issues needed to guide the nation. Given the benefits it offers, the idea needs to be debated and discussed threadbare in the intelligentsia, media, and academia, and of course legal and judicial circles.
If and when courts of appeal are created in India, only matters involving substantial questions of law or issues involving interpretation of the Constitution or validity of laws enacted by Parliament and state legislatures, disputes between the Centre and states or between two or more states, difference of opinion between courts of appeal or high courts and Presidential Reference would be dealt with the Supreme Court, making it a truly constitutional court.
Courts of appeal can bring down pendency
5