214th Report - Law Commission of India

More documents

Recommendations

Info

16issue. This aspect however has lost itssignificance because in the case of SubhashGupta the Attorney General made a statementthat the government had no objection to theHon’ble Court going into the question.3. The second Judges case Supreme Court Advocateson Record Association and others vs U.O.I.(reported in 1993(4) SCC 441It is in this backdrop that the nine judgesbench was constituted and judgment wasdelivered on 06/10/1993. The judgment runsinto 306 pages and travels far beyond theorder of reference.Noted jurist Late H.M.Seervai in his Constitutional Law of Indiafourth edition Silver Jubilee Edition (Volume1) has criticized this judgment and called it“null and void” for not following themandatory provisions of article 145(4) and (5)– (which is clear from the dissenting judgmentof Justice M.M. Punchi, the relevant portion
17of which is reproduced in the succeeding para)– which are not a matter of form ortechnicality but a matter of substance aspointed out in Mohhammad Akill vs Azad-unnisaaBibi’s case by Sir Barrnes Peacock C.J.,speaking on this point for a bench of ninejudges. “It is not a mere technical objectionbut is upon a fundamental principle essentialto the due administration of justice thatevery judicial act which is done by theseveral judges ought to be completed in thepresence of the whole of them…If afterdiscussion, and after deliberately weighingthe arguments of each other, the judges cannotagree, their several judgments ought to bedelivered in open court in the presence of theothers.” (Wyman’s Report Vol.5, p.69 quoted inRohilkhand Kumaon Bank Ltd. vs Row (1884) 6All. 468 at 474. (taken from Seervai’sConstitutional Law of India fourth edition
Page 1 and 2: GOVERNMENT OF INDIALAW COMMISSION O
Page 3 and 4: 3The 18 th Law Commission was const
Page 5 and 6: 5The text of this Report is availab
Page 7 and 8: 7PROPOSAL FOR RECONSIDERATION OF JU
Page 9 and 10: 9the judicial wing.But to contempla
Page 11 and 12: 11the special and pivotal position
Page 13 and 14: 13E.S. Venkataramaiah JJ, in S.P. G
Page 15: 15Chief Justice of India that is pr
Page 19 and 20: 19contributing and leave unsaid wha
Page 21 and 22: 21Para 491 - “At the outset, I mu
Page 23 and 24: 23in support of the conclusions rea
Page 25 and 26: 25Supreme Court and the High Courts
Page 27 and 28: 27be deemed to be punitive, and suc
Page 29 and 30: 29“This opinion has to be formed
Page 31 and 32: 31the opinion of the other function
Page 33 and 34: 33Supreme Court [Article 124 (2) of
Page 35 and 36: 353.Whether Article 124(2) as inter
Page 37 and 38: 378.Whether the Chief Justice of In
Page 39 and 40: 39Court to which the transfer is to
Page 41 and 42: 41the extent set out in the body of
Page 43 and 44: 43Provided that in the case of appo
Page 45 and 46: 45be consulted.The President should
Page 47 and 48: 47be followed in arriving at the Ch
Page 49 and 50: 49739, is urgently and immediately
Page 51 and 52: 51Chief Justice of the country. The
Page 53 and 54: 53Indian Constitution provides a be
Page 55 and 56: 55to adjudge the legal acumen. Thei
Page 57 and 58: 57“There was no problem till 1993
Page 59 and 60: 59It may be noted in this context t

214th Report - Law Commission of India

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?