The document discusses the importance of an independent judiciary in India. It notes that the founders of the Indian Constitution were concerned with establishing an independent judiciary to uphold democracy and the rule of law. The Supreme Court of India acts as the highest judicial body and protector of the Constitution. Judges are appointed by the President in consultation with the Chief Justice to help maintain independence from the legislative and executive branches. An independent judiciary is crucial for protecting citizens' rights and serving as a check on the other branches of government.

1. “ INDEPENDENCE OF INDIAN JUDICIARY AND SUPREME
COURT OF INDIA ”
By FAYA Group
Faizan Riyaz
Aman Soni
Yuvaraj Kumar Shah
Anubhav Chatterjee

2. INTRODUCTION
THE FIRST POLITICAL PHILOSOPHER, WHO PROPOUNDED THE IDEA OF AN INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY,
WAS MONTESQUIEU, THE FAMOUS FRENCH PHILOSOPHER. HE BELIEVED IN THE THEORY OF
SEPARATION OF POWERS OF THE THREE BRANCHES OF THE GOVERNMENT- LEGISLATURE, EXECUTIVE
AND JUDICIARY.
• THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY IS MOST IMPORTANCE IN UPHOLDING THE PILLARS OF THE
DEMOCRATIC SYSTEM HENCE ENSURING A FREE SOCIETY.
• THOSE WHO BELIEVE IN THE ABSOLUTE INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY SAY THAT DEMOCRACY
CANNOT BE POSSIBLE IN THE ABSENCE OF AN INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY.
OUR COUNTRY INDIA IS A DEMOCRATIC COUNTRY, MEANS THAT THE GOVERNMENT HAS TO BE BY THE
PEOPLE, FOR THE PEOPLE AND OF THE PEOPLE. IT GUARANTEES TO ITS CITIZENS VARIOUS RIGHTS
THROUGH ITS CONSTITUTION AND THE SUPREMACY OF THE CONSTITUTION CAN BE MAINTAINED ONLY
THROUGH AN IMPARTIAL AND INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY. THE FRAMERS OF THE CONSTITUTION AT THE
TIME OF FRAMING OUR CONSTITUTION WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE INDEPENDENCE AND THE KIND
OF JUDICIARY THIS COUNTRY NEEDED.
• ANDREW JACKSON- “ALL THE RIGHTS SECURED TO THE CITIZENS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION ARE
WORTH NOTHING, AND A MERE BUBBLE, EXCEPT GUARANTEED TO THEM BY AN INDEPENDENT AND
VIRTUOUS JUDICIARY.”

3. THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
 HIGHEST JUDICIAL BODY IN INDIA AND IS SITUTATED IN NEW DELHI.
 CAME INTO POWER ON 28TH JANUARY, 1950 JUST TWO DAYS AFTER THE CONSTITUTION
CAME INTO EFFECT.
 THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA AND 30 OTHER JUDGES MAKE UP THE SUPREME COURT OF
INDIA WHO ARE DIRRECTLY APPOINTED BY THE PRESIDENT OF INDIA.
 THE BIGGEST RESPONSIBILITY IS THAT IT IS THE HIGHEST COURT OF APPEAL AND IS ALSO
THE PROTECTOR OF THE CONSTITUTION IN THE COUNTRY.
 SUPREME COURT ACT AS GUARDIAN OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION.

4. HOW ARE THE JUDGES APPOINTED
TO THE JUDICIARY ?
 THE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA IS APPOINTED BY THE PRESIDENT AND HAS THE HIGHEST JUDICIAL
POSITION IN INDIA.
 ALL THE OTHER JUDGES OF THE SUPREME COURT AND HIGH COURT ARE ALSO APPOINTED BY
THE PRESIDENT WITH THE CONSULTATION OF CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA.
 COLLEGIUM BODY OF THE SUPREME COURT WITH PRESIDENT SELECT NEW JUDGES FOR
SUPREME COURT AND HIGH COURT.
 THE SENIOR MOST JUDGES IS USUALLY APPOINTED BY PRESIDENT CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA.
 ONCE ANY JUDGE IS APPOINTED TO THE SUPREME COURT OR HIGH COURT. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO
REMOVE HIM OR HER FROM THE POSITION.
 THE PRESIDENT OF INDIA IS NOT ANSWERABLE TO ANY COURT OF THE JUDICIARY.
 A JUDGE CAN ONLY BE REMOVED FROM POWER ONLY BY AN IMPEACHMENT MOTION* PASSED
SEPERATLY BY TWO-THIRDS MEMBERS OF THE TWO HOUSES OF THE PARLIAMENT.

5. POWERS OF THE JUDICIARY
• SEPARATION OF POWER: THIS IS AN IDEA THAT A GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS
BEST WHEN ITS POWERS DO NOT REST IN A SINGLE AUTHORITY BUT ARE
INSTEAD DIVIDED AMONG DIFFERENT BRANCHES.
• CHECK AND BALANCE: A SYSTEM THAT SEPARATES AND BLENDS THE POWERS OF
THE GOVERNMENT SO THAT EACH BRANCH SERVES AS A CHECK AND BALANCE
ON OTHERS.
• JUDICIAL REVIEW: IT IS THE DOCTRINE UNDER WHICH THE LEGISLATIVE AND
EXECUTIVE ACTIONS ARE SUBJECT TO REVIEW BY THE JUDICIARY.
• JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: THE THEORY BEHIND IT IS THAT THE COURTS SHOULD
ACTIVELY APPLY ITS INTERPRETATION TO LAWS AND LEGISLATION.OFTEN THIS
MEANS STRIKING DOWN PARTICULAR LAWS BECAUSE THEY DO NOT FIT WITHIN
THE COURT’S CONSTITUTIONAL BOUNDARIES.

6. INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY
 THE JUDICIARY OF INDIA IS AN INDEPENDENT BODY.
 IT IS SEPARAT FROM LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE BODIES OF THE INDIAN GOVERNMENT.
 THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE, I.E. THE CENTRE AND STATE GOVERNMENT, CAN NOT INTERFERE
IN THE WORK OF JUDICIARY.
 THE COURTS ARE NOT UNDER THE GOVERNMENT AND DON’T ACT ON THEIR BEHALF.
 JUDGES IN THE HIGH COURT AS WELL AS SUPREME COURT ARE APPOINTED WITH VERY LITTLE
INTERFERENCE FROM THE BRANCHES OF THE GOVERNMENT.
 IT IS ALSO VERY DIFFICULT TO REMOVE A JUDGE FROM HIS/HER POST.

7. ADVANTAGES OF AN INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY
 IT IS THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY THAT ALLOWS THE COURT TO PLAY A CENTRAL
ROLE IN ENSURING THAT THERE IS NO MISUSE OF POWER BY THE LEGISLATIVE AND EXECUTIVE.
 IT ALSO PLAYS A CRUCIAL ROLE IN PROTECTING THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT OF A CITIZEN
BECAUSE ANY ONE CAN APPROACH A COURT IF THEY BELIEVE THAT THEIR RIGHTS ARE
VIOLATED.
 POLITICIANS CANNOT USE THEIR POWER TO CHANGE ANY JUDGEMENT.

8. CONCLUSION
 THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY AS IS CLEAR FROM THE ABOVE DISCUSSION HOLD A PROMINENT POSITION AS FAR AS
THE INSTITUTION OF JUDICIARY IS CONCERNED. IT IS ALSO CLEAR FROM THE HISTORICAL OVERVIEW THAT JUDICIAL
INDEPENDENCE HAS FACED MANY OBSTACLES IN THE PAST ESPECIALLY IN RELATION TO THE APPOINTMENT AND THE
TRANSFER OF JUDGES. COURTS HAVE ALWAYS TRIED TO UPHOLD THE INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY AND HAVE ALWAYS SAID
THAT THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY IS A BASIC FEATURE OF THE CONSTITUTION. COURTS HAVE SAID SO BECAUSE THE
INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY IS THE PRE-REQUISITE FOR THE SMOOTH FUNCTIONING OF THE CONSTITUTION. THE VARIOUS
JUDGEMENTS HAVE ENSURED THE INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY SO FAR AND IT HAS BEEN GIVEN TOP MOST PRIORITY.
 INDEPENDENT JUDICIAL POWER IS IMPLICIT IN THE 'BASIC CONCEPT OF SEPARATION OF POWERS' AMONG A PLURALITY OF
AGENCIES AND THE TRIPARTITE SCHEME OF CHECKS AND BALANCES. THIS CONCEPT IS THE VERY 'HEART OF THE
CONSTITUTIONAL SCHEME'.
 THE CONSTITUTION PROVIDES FOR A JUDICIARY, WHICH IS INDEPENDENT. INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY IS IMPORTANT FOR
THE PURPOSE OF FAIR JUSTICE. THERE SHOULD BE NO INTERFERENCE BY THE LEGISLATURE OR THE EXECUTIVE, IN THE
PROCEEDINGS OF THE JUDICIARY SO THAT IT MAY TAKE A JUDGMENT THAT SEEMS REASONABLY FAIR. IN CASE OF
INTERVENTION, THERE MAY BE AN ELEMENT OF BIAS ON THE PART OF THE JUDGES IN TAKING A FAIR DECISION.

9. SUGGESTIONS
 TRANSPARENCY IN THE APPOINTMENT AND TRANSFER OF JUDGES. {NO ONE TO BECOME A JUDGE
WITHOUT SIGNIFICANT EXPERIENCE AS A LAWYER}.
 FREEDOM (JUSTICE) MINISTER TO BE PAID BASED ON QUALITY AND SPEED OF JUSTICE.
 TRAINING TO IMPROVE THE QUALITY AND EFFICIENCY OF JUSTICE WITH
SIGNIFICANT INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF JUDGES.

10. THANK YOU !