Scribd
Upload
40 views1 page

Gupta v. Union of India

The Supreme Court of India has interpreted the term "consultation" in the context of judicial appointments to mean that all parties must have access to the same facts in order to have effective consultation, though the president may have a different opinion than the Chief Justice of India. Two key rulings established that "consultation" does not mean "concurrence," allowing the government to appoint judges and reducing the judiciary's autonomy. As a result of political influence over appointments, conflicts of interest arose that undermined the integrity of the judicial system.

Uploaded by

Anudha Singhai
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
40 views1 page

Gupta v. Union of India

The Supreme Court of India has interpreted the term "consultation" in the context of judicial appointments to mean that all parties must have access to the same facts in order to have effective consultation, though the president may have a different opinion than the Chief Justice of India. Two key rulings established that "consultation" does not mean "concurrence," allowing the government to appoint judges and reducing the judiciary's autonomy. As a result of political influence over appointments, conflicts of interest arose that undermined the integrity of the judicial system.

Uploaded by

Anudha Singhai
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

FACTS

In an earlier Supreme Court of India case, Sakalchand Seth v. Union of India1, The
court interpreted "consultation" in the context of Supreme Court and High Court
appointments. According to the court, all constitutional functionaries must have the
same and full facts on which to base a decision in order to have effective consultation.
The court did, however, clarify that the president could have a different opinion than
the CJI.

A key principle of the ruling was that "Consultation" does not mean "Concurrence." This
resulted in a breach of the Constitution's essential protection of the judiciary's autonomy,
allowing the government to appoint judges. Nevertheless, the court went further. The court
upheld Sakalchand Seth's ruling in S.P. Gupta v. Union of India2, sealing the
independence of the judiciary in India once again.

Due to these rulings, the executive branch appointed judges to the higher courts. This made
the appointment process more susceptible to political influence and favouritism. Taking such
a regressive and poor decision came at a cost: the judiciary's freedom to make important
decisions was reduced. The judicial branch is completely at the mercy of the executive
branch, which selects judges and does not select judges, due to Sakalchand and SP
Gupta. This frequently led to conflicts of interest. With these decisions, the whole judicial
delivery system was tarnished.3

These two rulings were inevitably going to have a negative effect on the integrity and fairness
of the judiciary, which is frequently the last resort for the people of this democratic country
of India. As a result of his ruling, Bhagwati J. suggested that a judicial group be formed
to recommend judges for appointment to higher courts. Regardless of how high the
office may be, it would be improper to confide authority to a branch. 2nd Judges was
brought before the Supreme Court as a writ to fill vacancies in the higher judiciary. In
response to this writ appeal, the contentious SP Gupta ruling has been reconsidered. 4

1
Sakalchand Seth v. Union of India, 1997 S.C. 2328.
2
S.P. Gupta v. Union of India, 1982 S.C. 149.
3
Venkatesan, v. ‘Honesty Matters’ (2008) 25(20) Frontline,
<http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl2520/stories/20081010252003500.htm> accessed 14th July 2018.
4
Second judges’ case, The Economic Times - page 1. The Economic Times. Available at:
https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/topic/second-judges-case (Accessed: March 14, 2023).

You might also like