PowerPoint Presentation

[Virtual Presenter] Unit 1: Judiciary in Legal Studies.

[Audio] Unit 1: Judiciary in Legal Studies Duration: 3 weeks Week 1: Days 1-2: Topic a) Structure, Hierarchy of Courts, and Legal Officers in India Study the structure of the Indian judiciary, including the Supreme Court, High Courts, and District Courts. Understand the hierarchy and jurisdiction of different courts. Learn about the roles and functions of legal officers, such as judges, advocates, and public prosecutors. Topic b) Constitution, Roles and Impartiality Explore the constitutional provisions related to the judiciary in India. Understand the separation of powers and the role of the judiciary in upholding the rule of law. Study the concept of judicial independence and the importance of impartiality in the judiciary. Week 2: Days 3-4: Topic c) Appointments, retirement and removal of Judges Learn about the process of appointment of judges in the Supreme Court and High Courts. Understand the role of the President, Chief Justice of India, and collegium system in judicial appointments. Study the criteria for retirement and the procedure for removal of judges. Topic d) Tribunals Understand the concept of tribunals and their role in the Indian legal system. Study the types of tribunals and their jurisdiction in specific areas of law. Explore the advantages and challenges associated with the tribunal system..

[Audio] Week 3: Days 5: Topic e) Courts and Judicial Review Learn about the concept of judicial review and its significance in Indian democracy. Study landmark cases related to judicial review and their impact on the legal system. Understand the limitations and scope of judicial review in India. Revision and Practice Questions Allocate time for revision of the topics covered in the first three weeks. Solve practice questions related to the unit to reinforce your understanding. Identify any areas where you need further clarification or practice..

[Audio] Unit 1: Judiciary in Legal Studies Week 1 Topic a) Structure, Hierarchy of Courts, and Legal Officers in India Topic b) Constitution, Roles and Impartiality.

[Audio] Structure: In India, the judiciary is structured in a hierarchical manner, with different levels of courts and legal officers fulfilling specific roles. Understanding this structure is essential to navigate the legal system effectively. Supreme Court: The Supreme Court is the highest court in India. It consists of the Chief Justice of India and other judges. The Supreme Court has two main functions: it serves as the final authority to hear and decide on appeals from lower courts, and it has the power to review the constitutionality of laws and government actions. This means it ensures that laws and government actions are in line with the Indian Constitution. High Courts: Each state in India has a High Court. The High Courts have the power to hear appeals from lower courts within their respective state jurisdictions. They also have original jurisdiction in certain cases, meaning they can hear cases directly without any appeal. High Courts are responsible for supervising and guiding the lower courts within their jurisdiction. District Courts: At the district level, there are District Courts. These courts are presided over by judges and are responsible for handling civil and criminal cases within their specific districts. District Courts have the authority to hear cases for the first time, making them the primary trial courts at the district level..

Hierarchy and Jurisdiction of Courts : Higher courts have the power to review and decide on appeals from lower courts. For example, the Supreme Court can review appeals from High Courts, and High Courts can review appeals from District Courts. This hierarchical structure ensures that cases can be appealed to higher courts for further examination and resolution..

Topic b) Constitution, Roles and Impartiality. Constitution - The Constitution of India establishes the Judiciary as one of the three pillars of the Indian government, along with the Legislature and the Executive. The Judiciary is responsible for interpreting the Constitution and ensuring that the laws of the land are in accordance with it. The Judiciary also has the power to strike down laws that are unconstitutional. In addition, the Judiciary is responsible for resolving disputes between citizens and the government, and between citizens themselves. The Constitution of India specifically provides for the independence of the Judiciary. Article 50 of the Constitution states that "the independence of the Judiciary shall be secured." This means that the Judiciary should not be influenced by the Legislature or the Executive. The Constitution also provides for the appointment of judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts by the President of India in consultation with the Chief Justice of India. This ensures that the judges are appointed on the basis of merit, and not on political considerations. Roles of the Judiciary The Judiciary plays a vital role in the Indian democracy. It is responsible for interpreting the Constitution and ensuring that the laws of the land are in accordance with it. The Judiciary also has the power to strike down laws that are unconstitutional. In addition, the Judiciary is responsible for resolving disputes between citizens and the government, and between citizens themselves. The Judiciary plays a key role in upholding the rule of law. The rule of law means that everyone is subject to the law, including the government. The Judiciary ensures that the government does not violate the rights of citizens. The Judiciary also ensures that the laws of the land are applied fairly and justly. The Judiciary also plays a role in protecting the rights of citizens. The Constitution of India guarantees certain fundamental rights to citizens, such as the right to freedom of speech and expression, the right to life and liberty, and the right to equality. The Judiciary is responsible for protecting these rights..

Topic b) Constitution, Roles and Impartiality. Impartiality The Judiciary is expected to be impartial in its decisions. This means that it should not be influenced by political or personal considerations. The Constitution guarantees the independence of the Judiciary, and it is important that this independence is maintained in order to ensure that the Judiciary can fulfill its role effectively. The independence of the Judiciary is essential for the smooth functioning of the democratic system. If the Judiciary is not independent, it will not be able to uphold the rule of law or protect the rights of citizens. The independence of the Judiciary is also important for ensuring that the government does not become authoritarian. Conclusion The Judiciary is an important institution in the Indian democracy. It plays a vital role in upholding the rule of law and ensuring that the rights of citizens are protected. The independence of the Judiciary is essential for the smooth functioning of the democratic system..

Constitutional Provisions Related to the Judiciary in India The Constitution of India establishes the Judiciary as one of the three pillars of the Indian government, along with the Legislature and the Executive. The Judiciary is responsible for interpreting the Constitution and ensuring that the laws of the land are in accordance with it. The Judiciary also has the power to strike down laws that are unconstitutional. In addition, the Judiciary is responsible for resolving disputes between citizens and the government, and between citizens themselves. Some of the important provisions of the Constitution relating to the Judiciary are: The Supreme Court is the highest court in India. The High Courts are the highest courts in the states. Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are appointed by the President of India in consultation with the Chief Justice of India. Judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts can be removed from office only by impeachment. The Judiciary is independent of the Legislature and the Executive. The Judiciary has the power to strike down laws that are unconstitutional. The Judiciary is responsible for resolving disputes between citizens and the government, and between citizens themselves. The Separation of Powers The separation of powers is a principle of government that divides the powers of government into three branches: the Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary. This principle is designed to prevent any one branch of government from becoming too powerful. The Judiciary plays an important role in upholding the separation of powers. The Judiciary can strike down laws that are passed by the Legislature if they are unconstitutional. The Judiciary can also check the power of the Executive by ruling on the legality of executive actions..

The Role of the Judiciary in Upholding the Rule of Law The rule of law is a principle that states that everyone is subject to the law, including the government. The Judiciary plays a key role in upholding the rule of law by interpreting the Constitution and ensuring that the laws of the land are in accordance with it. The Judiciary also has the power to strike down laws that are unconstitutional. The Concept of Judicial Independence Judicial independence is the principle that the Judiciary should be free from political or other extraneous influences. This principle is essential for ensuring that the Judiciary can fulfill its role of upholding the rule of law and protecting the rights of citizens. There are a number of factors that can threaten judicial independence, such as political interference, corruption, and lack of resources. It is important to safeguard judicial independence in order to ensure that the Judiciary can function effectively and fulfill its role in a democracy. The Importance of Impartiality in the Judiciary Impartiality is the principle that judges should be impartial in their decisions. This means that they should not be influenced by personal opinions, beliefs, or biases. Impartiality is essential for ensuring that the Judiciary can deliver justice fairly and justly. There are a number of factors that can affect the impartiality of judges, such as their personal background, their political affiliations, and the pressure of public opinion. It is important to ensure that judges are impartial in their decisions in order to maintain public trust in the Judiciary. Conclusion The Judiciary is an important institution in the Indian democracy. It plays a vital role in upholding the rule of law and ensuring that the rights of citizens are protected. The independence of the Judiciary is essential for the smooth functioning of the democratic system..

Unit 1: Judiciary in Legal Studies Week 2 Topic C) Appointments, retirement and removal of Judges Topic D) Tribunals.

Topic C) Appointments, retirement and removal of Judges.

Topic C) Appointments, retirement and removal of Judges.

Topic D) Tribunals. Concept and Role of Tribunals: Tribunals are specialized bodies established under specific laws to handle disputes and matters related to specific areas of law. They act as alternative dispute resolution mechanisms outside the regular court system. Tribunals have jurisdiction over specific matters and provide specialized expertise in resolving disputes. Types of Tribunals: Administrative Tribunals: These tribunals handle disputes related to administrative matters, such as service, recruitment, and disciplinary actions of government employees. Tax Tribunals: These tribunals deal with tax-related disputes and appeals against decisions of tax authorities. Environment Tribunals: These tribunals focus on resolving disputes related to environmental issues and violations of environmental laws. Consumer Tribunals: These tribunals address consumer disputes and provide a forum for consumers to seek redressal for grievances. Jurisdiction of Tribunals: Each tribunal has jurisdiction over specific matters as defined by the law that establishes them. Their jurisdiction is limited to the areas of law for which they are created, and they possess the power to hear and decide cases within their jurisdiction. Advantages and Challenges of the Tribunal System: Advantages: Tribunals provide specialized expertise, faster resolution of disputes, cost-effective proceedings, and accessibility to justice. Challenges: Some challenges include the issue of limited appellate remedies, lack of uniformity in decisions, and concerns regarding the independence and accountability of tribunals..

Unit 1: Judiciary in Legal Studies Week 3 Topic e) Courts and Judicial Review.

e) Courts and Judicial Review. Judicial review is the power of the courts to review the actions of the government and to strike down those actions that are found to be unconstitutional. The power of judicial review is based on the idea that the constitution is the supreme law of the land, and that all other laws and government actions must be in accordance with it. If a law or government action is found to be unconstitutional, then it is invalid and cannot be enforced. The power of judicial review is an important safeguard against the abuse of power by the government. It ensures that the government cannot pass laws that violate the rights of its citizens, and that it must follow the law in its actions. There are two main types of judicial review: abstract review and concrete review. Abstract review is when the courts review the constitutionality of a law before it is actually implemented. This type of review is usually only used in cases where the law is considered to be particularly controversial or likely to be challenged. Concrete review is when the courts review the constitutionality of a law after it has been implemented. This type of review is more common, as it allows the courts to consider the actual impact of the law on individuals and groups. The power of judicial review is not absolute. There are some limitations on the scope of judicial review in India. For example, the courts cannot strike down laws that are passed by a two-thirds majority in the parliament. Another limitation on judicial review is that the courts cannot interfere with the day-to-day administration of the government. This means that the courts cannot strike down government policies or decisions that are not in violation of the constitution. Despite these limitations, the power of judicial review is an important safeguard against the abuse of power by the government. It is essential to the protection of individual rights and the rule of law in India..

e) Courts and Judicial Review. Here are some of the key principles of judicial review: The constitution is the supreme law of the land. All laws and government actions must be in accordance with the constitution. The courts have the power to strike down laws and government actions that are found to be unconstitutional. The power of judicial review is not absolute. There are some limitations on the scope of judicial review. The power of judicial review is an important part of the Indian constitution. It helps to ensure that the government does not abuse its power and that the rights of individuals are protected. Landmark cases related to judicial review in India and their impact on the legal system: Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): This case was a landmark decision in which the Supreme Court ruled that the basic structure of the constitution is inviolable. This means that the courts can strike down laws that they find to be in violation of the basic structure of the constitution. The basic structure doctrine has been used by the courts to strike down a number of laws, including laws that would have undermined the independence of the judiciary and the federal structure of the Indian government. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) : This case was a landmark decision in which the Supreme Court ruled that the right to life and liberty is a fundamental right, and that this right includes the right to procedural due process. This means that the government cannot deprive a person of their life or liberty without following fair procedures. The right to procedural due process has been used by the courts to strike down a number of laws, including laws that would have allowed the government to detain people without trial..

Landmark cases related to judicial review in India and their impact on the legal system:.

Limitations of Judicial Review in India. Separation of Powers: The doctrine of separation of powers restricts the judiciary from interfering with policy decisions made by the executive and legislative branches of the government. The courts must exercise restraint and avoid encroaching upon the domains of other branches. Non-justiciability: Certain matters, such as political questions, matters of policy, and matters falling within the exclusive domain of the executive, are considered non-justiciable. The courts may refrain from interfering in such matters and leave them to the discretion of the other branches. Judicial Self-Restraint: The judiciary may exercise self-restraint and avoid excessive interference in matters of policy and administration. The courts often refrain from substituting their own judgment for that of the executive and limit their review to questions of legality and constitutional validity. Limited Scope of Review: Judicial review in India is primarily concerned with constitutional validity and legality. The courts generally do not review the merits or wisdom of legislative or executive actions unless they violate fundamental rights or are ultra vires the constitution. Parliament's Supremacy: Although the judiciary has the power of judicial review, Parliament retains the power to amend the constitution and enact laws. The courts cannot invalidate a law passed by Parliament unless it violates the provisions of the constitution..

Scope of Judicial Review in India. Constitutional Validity: The courts in India have the power to strike down laws and executive actions that are inconsistent with the provisions of the constitution. They ensure that the legislative and executive branches act within the limits set by the constitution. Protection of Fundamental Rights: Judicial review plays a crucial role in safeguarding fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution. The courts can strike down laws and actions that infringe upon these rights and provide remedies to the aggrieved individuals. Administrative Actions: The courts can review the legality and fairness of administrative actions, including decisions made by government authorities, tribunals, and administrative bodies. They ensure that these actions adhere to the principles of natural justice and are free from arbitrariness. Public Interest Litigation (PIL): Judicial review in India also extends to PIL, which allows individuals and organizations to approach the courts on behalf of the public interest. PIL enables the judiciary to address issues of social justice, human rights violations, and environmental concerns. It is important to note that the limitations and scope of judicial review may evolve through judicial interpretations and landmark judgments, as the judiciary adapts to the changing needs of society and the constitutional framework..

The importance of impartiality and judicial independence, along with the background of the case: Keshavananda Bharati Case: Background: The Keshavananda Bharati case, also known as the Fundamental Rights case, was a landmark judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India in 1973. It revolved around the question of whether the Parliament had the power to amend any part of the Indian Constitution, including its basic structure. Importance of Impartiality and Judicial Independence: The case highlighted the crucial role of impartiality and judicial independence in upholding the Constitution. The judges demonstrated their commitment to fairness and neutrality by interpreting the Constitution without any influence from external factors. Key Points: The Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice S. M. Sikri, held that while Parliament had the power to amend the Constitution, it couldn't alter its basic structure. The judgment affirmed the supremacy of the Constitution and its fundamental principles, safeguarding the rights of the people. The decision established the doctrine of basic structure, which protects the core elements of the Constitution from arbitrary amendments. Significance: The Keshavananda Bharati case is considered a landmark judgment as it set an important precedent for the protection of fundamental rights and the maintenance of the Constitution's basic structure. It showcased the judiciary's independence in safeguarding the Constitution and its commitment to ensuring a fair and just society..

S.P. Gupta Case: Background : The S.P. Gupta case, also known as the Judges' Transfer case, was a significant legal matter that arose in 1981. It dealt with the transfer and appointment of judges in the higher judiciary. Importance of Impartiality and Judicial Independence: The case emphasized the need for impartiality in the process of selecting and transferring judges to maintain judicial independence. It aimed to ensure that such decisions were made based on objective criteria, free from any bias or external influence. Key Points: The Supreme Court, in its judgment, highlighted the importance of establishing an independent collegium system for the appointment and transfer of judges. The decision aimed to protect the judiciary from undue interference and ensure transparency in the process. The judgment led to the development of the collegium system, where the Chief Justice of India and a group of senior judges play a crucial role in the appointment and transfer of judges. Significance: The S.P. Gupta case brought attention to the need for a fair and objective process in the appointment and transfer of judges, ensuring their independence. It reinforced the principle of judicial independence and the judiciary's role as a check on the executive branch..

Topic C) Appointments, retirement and removal of Judges.

Q & A the topic "Structure, Hierarchy of Courts, and Legal Officers in India".

Q & A the topic " Constitution, Roles and Impartiality ".

Q & A the topic " Constitution, Roles and Impartiality ".

MCQ's. Q Who appoints the judges of the Supreme Court of India? (a) The President of India (b) The Prime Minister of India (c) The Parliament of India (d) The Chief Justice of India Answer: (a) Explanation: Article 124(2) of the Constitution of India states that the President shall appoint the judges of the Supreme Court after consultation with the Chief Justice of India and such other judges of the Supreme Court and the High Courts in India as he may deem necessary. Q What is the minimum age requirement for a person to be appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court of India? (a) 35 years (b) 40 years (c) 50 years (d) 60 years Answer: (c) Explanation: Article 124(3) of the Constitution of India states that a person shall not be qualified for appointment as a judge of the Supreme Court unless he is a citizen of India and has been a judge of a High Court for at least five years or an advocate of a High Court for at least ten years..

MCQ's. Q How many judges are there in the Supreme Court of India at present? (a) 25 (b) 30 (c) 34 (d) 40 Answer: (c) Explanation : As of June 2023, there are 34 judges in the Supreme Court of India. This is the maximum number of judges that can be appointed to the Supreme Court, as per Article 124(1) of the Constitution of India. Q What is the maximum age of retirement for a judge of the Supreme Court of India? (a) 62 years (b) 65 years (c) 67 years (d) 70 years Answer: (b) Explanation : Article 124(4) of the Constitution of India states that a judge of the Supreme Court shall hold office until he attains the age of 65 years. However, a judge may resign from his office before attaining the age of 65 years..

MCQ's. Q A judge of the Supreme Court of India can be removed from office only on the ground of Misbehaviour Incapacity Both misbehaviour and incapacity None of the above Answer: (c) Explanation : Article 124(4) of the Constitution of India states that a judge of the Supreme Court shall be removed from office by the President if the Supreme Court, on a motion made by either House of Parliament, declares by a majority of two-thirds of the members present and voting that the judge has been guilty of misbehaviour or incapacity. Q A motion for the removal of a judge of the Supreme Court of India can be initiated by The President of India The Prime Minister of India The Parliament of India Either the House of the People or the Council of States Answer: (d) Explanation : Article 124(4) of the Constitution of India states that a motion for the removal of a judge of the Supreme Court shall be made in the House of the People first. If the motion is passed by a majority of the members present and voting, it shall be sent to the Council of States. The Council of States may pass the motion by a majority of the members present and voting..

Q Which of the following is not a limitation on the scope of judicial review in India? The courts cannot strike down laws that are passed by a two-thirds majority in the Parliament. The courts cannot interfere with the day-to-day administration of the government. The courts can review the wisdom or policy of laws or government actions. The courts can only review whether the law or government action is in accordance with the Constitution. Answer: (c) Explanation : The power of judicial review is not absolute. There are some limitations on the scope of judicial review in India. For example, the courts cannot review the wisdom or policy of laws or government actions. This is because the courts are not elected representatives, and they do not have the same mandate as the Parliament. Q. Which of the following cases established the doctrine of the basic structure of the Constitution? Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India Romesh Thappar v. State of Madras Minerva Mills v. Union of India Answer: (a) Explanation : The doctrine of the basic structure of the Constitution was established in the case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973). This case held that the Constitution has a basic structure, which cannot be amended by the Parliament. The basic structure includes the fundamental rights, the federal structure, and the independence of the judiciary..

Q. Which of the following is not a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution? Right to life and liberty Right to freedom of speech and expression Right to property Right to education Answer: (c) Explanation : The right to property was a fundamental right under the Indian Constitution until 1978. However, it was deleted by the 44th Amendment to the Constitution. The other fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution are the right to life and liberty, the right to freedom of speech and expression, the right to equality, and the right to education. Q. The power of judicial review is vested in which of the following? The Supreme Court The High Courts The District Courts All of the above Answer: (d) Explanation : The power of judicial review is vested in the Supreme Court, the High Courts, and the District Courts. This means that any court in India can strike down a law or government action that it finds to be unconstitutional..

Q. The power of judicial review is based on the principle of which of the following? The separation of powers The rule of law The supremacy of the Constitution All of the above Answer: (d) Explanation : The power of judicial review is based on the principles of the separation of powers, the rule of law, and the supremacy of the Constitution. The separation of powers means that the powers of the government are divided between the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. The rule of law means that everyone is subject to the law, including the government. The supremacy of the Constitution means that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and that all other laws and government actions must be in accordance with it..

Q & A the topic "Structure, Hierarchy of Courts, and Legal Officers in India".