Judiciary — Practice

Question 1

Match each situation with the appropriate writ and explain why that writ applies:
(a) A journalist is arrested without any charge and held in police custody for 15 days
(b) A municipal officer refuses to register a citizen's complaint despite being legally required to do so
(c) A person falsely claims to be a retired IAS officer and applies for benefits meant for government employees
(d) A lower court passes an order that clearly falls outside its legal jurisdiction

Accepted Answer

(a) **Habeas Corpus** ('produce the body'): The journalist is detained without charge — this is unlawful detention. A writ of Habeas Corpus directs the detaining authority to produce the detained person before the court and justify the detention. If the detention is illegal, the court orders immediate release. This writ protects personal liberty and is the most important safeguard against arbitrary arrest.

(b) **Mandamus** ('we command'): The municipal officer has a LEGAL DUTY to register complaints but is refusing. Mandamus orders a public official or body to perform a legal duty that they are obligated to perform but are refusing. It commands: 'do your duty.' Cannot be used against private individuals — only against public authorities.

(c) **Quo Warranto** ('by what authority'): This writ challenges a person's RIGHT TO HOLD a public office or enjoy a public franchise. If someone falsely claims to be a retired IAS officer and seeks government benefits, Quo Warranto can be issued to force them to show the legal basis of their claim to that status.

(d) **Certiorari**: Issued by a higher court to quash (cancel) a decision of a lower court that acted BEYOND ITS JURISDICTION or violated principles of natural justice. The higher court examines the lower court's proceedings and cancels the order if it was issued illegally.

Question 2

Explain THREE mechanisms that ensure the independence of India's Supreme Court judges from the executive branch. Why is judicial independence essential for constitutional democracy?

Accepted Answer

**Three Mechanisms for Judicial Independence**:

1. **Security of Tenure**: A SC judge holds office until age 65 (HC judge until 62). They CANNOT be removed during this period except through the extremely difficult impeachment process (address by both Houses + Presidential order). This means the executive cannot threaten judges with removal to influence their decisions. No SC judge has ever been removed through this process.

2. **Non-Diminishable Service Conditions**: A judge's salary, pension, and privileges are charged to the Consolidated Fund of India — NOT voted on by Parliament annually. Parliament cannot reduce a sitting judge's salary as punishment for an unpopular judgment. Financial security = judicial freedom.

3. **Collegium Appointment System** (result of Three Judges Cases, 1993): The executive (Central government) CANNOT appoint a judge whom the Supreme Court Collegium (CJI + 4 senior-most judges) has not recommended. This ensures the judiciary controls its own composition. Without this, governments could pack courts with compliant judges.

**Why independence is essential**:
Constitutional democracy requires that someone checks the most powerful branch (legislature + executive). If judges depend on the government for their jobs and salaries, they will fear ruling against the government in rights cases. The Constitution protects individual rights against the state — but if courts are not independent of the state, those protections are meaningless. Independent judiciary = government can be held accountable = rights are real, not just words.

Question 3

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has transformed the Supreme Court from an elite forum into a people's court. Explain the origin and working of PIL. Evaluate its positive impact AND the concerns raised about 'judicial overreach.'

Accepted Answer

**Origin of PIL**:
Traditionally, only the AFFECTED PARTY could approach the court (locus standi rule). Justice P.N. Bhagwati and Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer (1970s–1980s) liberalised locus standi: any PUBLIC-SPIRITED PERSON (not just the victim) could file a writ petition for enforcement of constitutional rights of marginalised groups. The court also began accepting LETTERS as petitions (epistolary jurisdiction) — a letter from a journalist about jail conditions could become a PIL.

**Working**:
(i) Any citizen (or the court itself, suo motu) can file a PIL in the Supreme Court (Art 32) or High Courts (Art 226).
(ii) The petitioner need not be personally affected — only public interest must be demonstrated.
(iii) No court fees for PIL — making it accessible.
(iv) Court can issue comprehensive remedial orders, not just rule for/against — it can monitor implementation.

**Positive Impact**:
1. **Environmental protection**: M.C. Mehta v. Union of India series — Ganga pollution, Delhi air quality, Taj Mahal protection. Court ordered industries to shut down, vehicles to convert to CNG, industries to relocate.
2. **Bonded labour and child labour**: Courts directed government to identify, rescue, and rehabilitate bonded labourers; banned child labour in hazardous industries.
3. **Prison conditions**: Hussainara Khatoon (1979) — Bihar undertrial prisoners kept for years without trial. SC directed their release; established principle of speedy trial under Art 21.
4. **Road safety**: Courts ordered helmets, seat belts, and driving licence enforcement.
5. **Right to food**: People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India — SC directed states to implement mid-day meal scheme in all government schools; oversaw implementation.

**Concerns about Judicial Overreach**:
1. **Separation of powers violation**: Courts directing government policy (mid-day meals, MGNREGA wages, highway liquor bans) intrudes into the executive's domain. Courts are good at saying what the law IS — are they equipped to manage social programmes?
2. **Accountability without mandate**: Judges are not elected, do not face the people, and cannot be removed easily. When judges make policy through PILs, they exercise power without democratic accountability.
3. **Frivolous PILs ('PIL industry')**: Some PILs are filed for personal gain (publicity, harassment of rivals, extracting settlements). Courts impose costs on frivolous filers but the problem persists.
4. **Inconsistent standards**: SC has issued PILs on cricket governance and OTT content — critics ask whether these are genuinely fundamental rights issues or judicial management of civil society.
5. **Contradiction with limited judicial capacity**: India's courts have 4.5 crore pending cases. Every hour spent on celebrity PILs is an hour not spent on criminal cases where accused spend years in undertrial detention.

**Balance**: PIL's democratising achievement (rights of prisoners, bonded labourers, slum dwellers) is profound and irreversible. The challenge is preventing it from becoming a tool for policy capture by vocal elite interests while neglecting mass justice — the 4.5 crore ordinary cases awaiting decision.

Practice — Judiciary

Sign in to save attempts to your dashboard and track your accuracy over time

Find a verified tutor

Join a live course

Browse coaching centres

About

Categories

Support

Documentation

Get Study Tips & Updates

Download Our App

Download for iOS

Download for Android

Popular Cities