LEGAL METHOD ASSIGNMENTS ON:

STRUCTURE OF INDIAN LEGAL SYSTEM

Contents

(1)
(2)

Introduction
Indian legal system
Components of Indian legal system
Rule of law
Classification of Indian legal system
Structure of Indian legal system
Supreme court
High court
Place of Indian legal system
Conclusion

Introduction
Broadly speaking jurisprudence has been defined as a science of law. Law, thus, is
the subject matter of jurisprudence. The meaning of the term law, hence is the
fundamental importance for jurisprudence. The problem of the definition of law is
as old as Greek and Roman philosophy itself. There have been conflicting and
divergent views of the jurists regarding the nature, concept basis and functions of
law. Various jurists have been given different definitions of law in different
historical contexts and starting from different premises. It has been said that law is
that which establishes uniformity of conduct; that which seeks to achieve an ethical
purpose: that which expresses social solidarity of the group in which it operates;
that which comprises the rules which protect interest, whether of individual or
groups etc. These are but only some of the views expressed by writers.
The term law is sometimes used as such, sometimes as a law and sometimes as
the law, when it used in law or the law it is said to be used in the extract
sense i.e., representing the entire body of law, for example, law of India. When it
is used as a law it is said to be used as referring to a particular law or enactment.
The termlaw has generally been used to mean three things. Firstly, it is used to
mean legal order that is the regime of adjusting relations and ordering political
society. Secondly, it means the whole body of legal percepts which obtained a
political organized society. But laws in this sense are but raw materials of law.
When we speak of law, we speak of something more enduring than laws. Law in
this sense is made of percepts, traditions and ideals. This element come down to a
social order of time and place a legal tradition as to what that social order is and
what are the ends and purposes of social control. Thirdly, it is used to mean all
official control in a politically organized society. This leads to an increased
attention to the phenomena of the actual authoritative material for the guidance of
judicial action. Not frequently law is used to include all three of the foregoing
meanings. Thus, difficulties in discussing the nature and definition of law arise
primarily from the different meanings to the world given by analytical, historical,
philosophical, and other jurists. These different meanings of the term law are the
source of difficulty in discussing the nature of law. If we restrict the term to the
body of authoritative determination it is possible to look at those materials from

more than one standpoint, viz., that of (1) law- maker (this defines law in term of
rules); (2) from that of the individuals (this will mean law as a rule of conduct- a
guide directing the individual what he ought to do or not to do); (3) that of the
judge (here it is a body of authoritative grounds and models or pattern for the
decisions or of administrative actions); (4) that of the counselor or legal advisor
(here it is the body of basis of prediction of official action) and (5) that of the law
teacher or jurists (here law becomes the basis of development of juristic
philosophy).
The law responds to the changing society, than either it will stifle the growth of the
society and choke its progress if the society is vigorous enough, it will cast away
the law which stands in the way of its growth law, must therefore, constantly be
on the move adopting itself to the fast changing society and not leg behind.

Indian Legal System

Law defines the political organization and structure of society, provides a scheme
of individual relationship within it and contributes to the stability of society by
offering an objective mechanism for the resolution of disputes and conflicts within
the community. All extensive human societies possess law in some form or other.
Legal System is the totality of the laws of a State or community.
The legal system of a country is part of its social system and reflects the social,
political, economic and cultural characteristics of that society. The Indian legal
system based on British model is full of technicalities and procedures, and this
makes the system still foreign to the majority of Indians (whose legal culture is
more indigenous) and limits the access to justice for poor and illiterate people.
Nevertheless, the rights and benefits conferred by the law and the constitution offer
the opportunity for those very people to enjoy the fruits of a welfare democracy.
Thus, every Indian should be familiar with law and its procedures.
The Indian Legal System is one of the oldest legal systems in the entire history of
the world. It has altered as well as developed over the past few centuries to absorb
inferences from the legal systems across the world. The Constitution of India is the
fountainhead of the Indian Legal System. It demonstrates the AngloSaxon
character of judiciary which is basically drawn from the British Legal System
because of the long period of British colonial influence during the British Raj.
There is a single hierarchy of courts in India. Much of contemporary Indian law
shows substantial European and American influence. Various acts and ordinances
first introduced by the British are still in effect in modified form today. During the
drafting of the Indian Constitution, laws from Ireland, the United States, Britain,
and France were all synthesized to get a refined set of Indian laws as it currently
stands. Indian laws also adhere to the United Nations guidelines on human rights
law and environmental law. Certain international trade laws, such as those on
intellectual property, are also enforced in India.
Each state drafts it own laws, however all the states have more or less the same
laws. Laws directed by the central government and the Supreme Court of India via
judicial precedent or general policy directives are binding on all citizens of each
state. Each state has its own labor laws and taxation rates.

Components of Indian Legal System

A legal system consists of:
(1) Certain basic principles and values, largely outlined by the Constitution,
(2) A set of operational norms including rights and duties of citizens spelt out in
the laws,
(3) Institutional structures for enforcement of the laws, and,
(4) A cadre of legal personnel for administering the system.

(1) The Constitution

It is written document, the fundamental law of the land, which declares India to be
socialist, secular, democratic, republic, having a quasi-federal structure. It is a
political document which distributes State power amongst different organs
(legislative, executive and judiciary) and regulates its exercise in its effect of
people.
To achieve the goal of dignity of the individual with justice, liberty, and equality
(as set out in the Preamble), the constitution guarantees certain fundamental rights
(equality before law, protection of life and personal liberty, right to freedom of
religion, etc.) and provides for its easy enforcement through the High courts and
the Supreme Court. Further, State to follow its policies and programmes.
The Constitution envisages a unique place for the judiciary in the country. The
judiciary keeps a check on the exercise of State power by executive and
legislatures, and protects the citizens rights through the writ. The rule of law is
supreme and the independence of judiciary is a living reality in our country. These
form the bulwark of democracy and compels everyone to abide by the law in his
own interest.

(2) Laws : Civil and Criminal

Criminal law, one of two broad categories of law, deals with acts of intentional
harm to individuals but which, in a larger sense, are offences against us all. It is a
crime to break into a home because the act not only violates the privacy and safety
of the home's occupants - it shatters the collective sense that we are secure in our
own homes. A crime is a deliberate or reckless act that causes harm to another
person or another person's property, and it is also a crime to neglect a duty to
protect others from harm. Canada's Criminal Code, created in 1892, lists hundreds
of criminal offences - from vandalism to murder - and stipulates the range of
punishment that can be imposed. Since crimes are an offence against society,
normally the state or Crown investigates and prosecutes criminal allegations on the
victim's behalf. The police gather evidence and, in court, public prosecutors
present the case against the person accused of the crime. For someone to be
convicted of a crime, it must be proven that a crime was committed and, for most
offences, that the person meant to commit the crime. For instance, striking another
person is the crime of assault but it is only a crime if the blow was intentional.
Civil law deals with disputes between private parties, or negligent acts that cause
harm to others . For example, if individuals or companies disagree over the terms
of an agreement, or who owns land or buildings, or whether a person was
wrongfully dismissed from their employment, they may file a lawsuit asking the
courts to decide who is right. As well, the failure to exercise the degree of caution
that an ordinarily prudent person would take in any situation may result in a
negligence claim. Depending on the circumstances, a person may be held
responsible for any damages or injury that occurs as a result of their negligence.
Family law cases involving divorce, parental responsibility for children, spousal
support, child support and division of property between spouses or common law
couples represent a large portion of the civil law cases presented to the courts.
Challenges to decisions of administrative tribunals, allegations of medical
malpractice and applications for distribution of the estates of deceased persons are
other examples of civil cases. The party who brings the legal action is known as
the plaintiff or applicant, while the party being sued is the defendant or respondent.
The courts may dismiss a case, or if it is found to have merit, the courts may order
the losing party to take corrective action, although the usual outcome is an order to

pay damages - a monetary award designed to make up for the harm inflicted. The
state plays no role in civil cases, unless the government launches a lawsuit or is the
party being sued. Parties retain a lawyer - or may choose to represent themselves to gather evidence and present the case in court.

(3) Institutional Structures : Court of Law

Courts are institutions wherein disputes are adjudicated and justice administered.
They are created by the statutes and enjoy such powers and jurisdiction which the
statutes confer. The constitution itself provides for the Supreme Court and High
Court in each State, which resolves dispute between Union and State, State and the
citizen and in limited cases appeals arising out of private disputes involving
substantial questions of law. This higher judiciary is named as the Union Judiciary.
Citizens can directly approach these higher courts to seek redress for the violation
of Fundamentals Rights. The High Courts and Supreme Court enjoy civil and
criminal jurisdiction apart from the writ jurisdiction. The Supreme Court is the
highest court of appeal, i.e. , could hear appeal from any court on any matter.
The subordinate courts comprises the State Judiciary. On the criminal side, the Cr.
P.C. provides for the Magistrate Courts, and above them the Sessions Court,
usually one in each district. On the civil side, the C.P.C., provides for the Munsiffs
Court, the Sub-Divisional Court and the District Court varying pecuniary and
territorial jurisdiction.
There can be Special Courts set up for specific purposes and also Administrative
and Revenue Tribunals to adjudicate upon specific categories of disputes e.g.
Claims Tribunals for Motor Vehicles Compensation, Income-Tax Tribunals, etc.

(4) Legal Personal : Judges, Lawyers and the Bar

Administration of justice requires the cooperation not only of parties and judges
but also of the officers of the court i.e. the Advocates, the court staff, etc. An
estimated more than 3,00,000 advocates and over 20,000 of Judges constitute the
cadre of the legal personnel.
All judges, whether of lower or higher courts, are independent of both the
legislature and the executive and are free to administer law without fear or favour.
They have the power to punish those who commit contempt of court or disobey
their legitimate orders. The president, acting on the advice of the Cabinet and the
Chief Justice of India, appoints the judges of the Supreme Court and the High
Courts. The Governor of the State appoints the judicial officers of the State. The
lower judges are selected through states judicial services.
Lawyers are the key functionaries assisting the judges in the administration of
justice. The Advocates Act, 1961, provides that only lawyers may practice before
the courts. Without the expert assistance of lawyers, judges will find it difficult to
unravel the truth on disputed facts in issues and interpret the law applicable to
different situations. That is why the legal professions is often referred to as a noble
and learned profession. For organizational purposes, the lawyers have formed
themselves into bar associations.

Rule of law
What is the Rule of Law?
The rule of law is a system in which the following four universal principles are
upheld:
1.
The government and its officials and agents as well as individuals and
private entities are accountable under the law.
2.
The laws are clear, publicized, stable and just, are applied evenly, and
protect fundamental rights, including the security of persons and property.
3.
The process by which the laws are enacted, administered and enforced is
accessible, fair and efficient.
4.
Justice is delivered timely by competent, ethical, and independent
representatives and neutrals who are of sufficient number, have adequate
resources, and reflect the makeup of the communities they serve.
These four universal principles which comprise the WJP's notion of the rule of law
are further developed in the nine factors of the
WHY THE RULE OF LAW MATTERS TO EVERYONE
The rule of law is the underlying framework of rules and rights that make
prosperous and fair societies possible. The rule of law is a system in which no one,
including government, is above the law; where laws protect fundamental rights;
and where justice is accessible to all.
FACTORS
Limited Government Powers
In a society governed by the rule of law, the government and its officials and
agents are subject to and held accountable under the law. Modern societies have
developed systems of checks and.

 Absence of Corruption
The absence of corruption - conventionally defined as the use of public power for
private gain - is one of the hallmarks of a society governed by the rule of law, as
corruption is a manifestation.
Order and Security
Human security is one of the defining aspects of any rule of law society. Protecting
human security, mainly assuring the security of persons and property, is a
fundamental function of the state.
Fundamental Rights
Under the rule of law, fundamental rights must be effectively guaranteed. A system
of positive law that fails to respect core human rights established under
international law is at best rule by.
Open Government
Open government is essential to the rule of law. It involves engagement, access,
participation, and collaboration between the government and its citizens, and plays
a crucial role in the promotion.
Regulatory Enforcement
Public enforcement of government regulations is pervasive in modern societies as a
method to induce conduct. A critical feature of the rule of law is that such rules are
upheld and properly.
Civil Justice
In a rule of law society, ordinary people should be able to resolve their grievances
and obtain remedies in conformity with fundamental rights through formal
institutions of justice in a peaceful.

 Criminal Justice
An effective criminal justice system is a key aspect of the rule of law, as it
constitutes the natural mechanism to redress grievances and bring action against
individuals for offenses against.
Informal Justice
For many countries it is important to acknowledge the role played by traditional, or
informal, systems of law including traditional, tribal, and religious courts, as
well as community-based.

CLASSIFICATIONS OF INDIAN LEGAL SYSTEM:

The judicial system or Indian legal system is a unique feature of the Indian
Constitution. It is an integrated system of courts that administer both state and
union laws. The Supreme Court of India is the uppermost part in the Indian legal
system. Under this, each state or a group of states possesses High Courts. There are
several subordinate courts under these High Courts.
BASICS OF INDIAN LEGAL SYSTEM:
The President of India appoints the Chief Justice and the other judges of the
Supreme Court. The Supreme Court of India has its own advisory and appellate
jurisdiction that extends to the enforcement of primary rights mentioned by the
Indian Constitution and to any argument in between the Government of India and
all the states of India.
While the Indian legal system is measured fair, a large backlog of different types of
cases can be found and regular dissolutions can effect in the delay before the
closing of a particular case. Though, matters of precedence and public interest
are dealt with efficiently. Besides these, interim relief is also allowed in other
cases where it is necessary.

JUDICIARY SYSTEM IN INDIAN VILLAGES:

In rural areas of India, people are encouraged to resolve their problems with help
of one main legal system which is Panchayats. it is mainly a group of five
respected people of a village and they are appointed by the local people to solve
their problems.
Moreover, to encourage both the trade and industry in India, the existing settlement
law is proposed to be improved under the Arbitration and Conciliation Bill 1995
COURTS STRUCTURE:
India has a quasifederal structure with 29 States further subdivided into
about 601 administrative Districts. The Judicial system however has a unified
structure. The Supreme Court, the High Courts and the lower Courts constitute a
single Judiciary. Broadly there is a three tier division.
Each District has a District Court and each State a High Court. The Supreme Court
of India is the Apex Court. Each State has its own laws constituting Courts
subordinate to the District Courts. Besides, a number of judicial Tribunals have
been set up in specialized areas. The significant Tribunals are: Company Law
Board; Monopolistic and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission; Securities
Appellate Tribunal; Consumer Protection Forum; Board for Industrial and
Financial Reconstruction; Customs and Excise Control Tribunal; Tax Tribunal; etc.
These Tribunals function under the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court
where they may be situated.
SUPREME COURT
The Indian Judicial System has the Supreme Court of India at its helm, which at
present is located only in the capital city of Delhi, without any benches in any part
of the nation, and is presided by the Chief Justice of India. The Supreme Court of
India has many Benches for the litigation, and this apex court is not only the final
court of permissible Appeal, but also deals with interstate matters, and matters
comprising of more than one state, and the matters between the Union Government
and any one or more states, as the matters on its original side. The President of
India can always seek consultation and guidance including the opinion of the apex

court and its judges. This court also has powers to punish anybody for its own
contempt.
The largest bench of the Supreme Court of India is called the Constitution Bench
and comprises of 5 or 7 judges, depending on the importance attached of the
matters before it, as well as the work load of the court.
The apex court comprises only of various benches comprising of the Divisional
benches of 2 and 3 judges, and the Full benches of 3 or 5 judges.
The Appeals to this court are allowed from the High Court, only after the matter is
deemed to be important enough on the point of law or on the subject of the
constitution of the nation, and is certified as such by the relevant High Court.
In the absence of any certificate from the High Court, a person may, with the leave
of the apex court, appeal to this court, by filing a Special Leave Petition before the
court.
A person or body may also file a Writ against the violation of Fundamental Rights
granted under the Constitution of India, with the permission of the apex court.
Certain writs are allowed to be instituted in the apex court directly, against the
orders of the Courts of the Court Martial, and the Central Administrative
Tribunals.
HIGH COURTS
Every State has a High Court, which works under the direct guidance and
supervision of the Supreme Court of India, and is the uppermost court in that state,
and generally the last court of regular appeals. Though generally the High Courts
are only the courts of Appeal, however in the three presidency towns (As the
British had then termed) of Mumbai [Bombay], Chennai [Madras] and Kolkata
[Calcutta], the High Courts also have powers of the original Side beyond a certain
financial limit.
The High Courts are also termed as the courts of equity, and can be approached in
writs not only for violation of fundamental rights under the provisions of
Article 32 of the Indian constitution, but also for any other rights under Article
226 of the Constitution, and under its powers to supervise over all its subordinate

courts falling within the physical jurisdiction of the same under Article 227 of
the Constitution. In fact, when apparently there is no effective remedy
available to a person in equity, it can always move the High Court in an
appropriate writ. High Courts frame their own rules, and arrange to implement
them.
Under certain provisions of Law, the High Courts have the ordinary original civil
jurisdiction. Many times the High Courts have concurrent jurisdiction along with
its subordinate courts, for effective remedy at the earliest.
All the High Courts have different division benches in different parts of the
respective states for speedier cheaper and effective dispensing of justice. For the
purpose of disposal of its business, the Judges in the High Court, either sit singly or
in benches of two or more judges in benches for deciding more important matters.
SUBORDINATE COURTS TO HIGH COURT
Each state is divided into judicial districts presided over by a District and Sessions
Judge. He is known as a District Judge when he presides over a civil case, and a
Sessions Judge when he presides over a criminal case. He is the highest judicial
authority below a High Court judge.
Below him, there are courts of civil jurisdiction, known by different names in
different states:-

DISTRICT JUDGES
These courts are primarily Civil Courts to hear generally the appeals from the
courts of original civil jurisdiction in the Districts and Tehsils (Talukas). However
these courts have also been given original civil jurisdiction under many
enactments.
SESSIONS JUDGES
These courts are primarily Criminal Courts, with jurisdiction to revise the orders
from the subordinate magistrates as well as to try serious offences, as prescribed by
law.

APPELLATE COOPERATIVE COURTS

These courts hear only the Appeals and revisions emanating from the
judgments and orders of the subordinate original CoOperative Courts and officers,
under the provisions of various CoOperative and related laws.
APPELLATE LABOUR COURTS
These courts hear only the Appeals and revisions emanating from the
judgments and orders of the subordinate original Labour Courts and officers,
under the provisions of various labour and related laws.
INCOME TAX TRIBUNALS
These courts though being primarily administrative in nature, yet they hear the
Appeals and revisions emanating from the judgments and orders of the subordinate
officers of the department, under the provisions of the Income Tax and other
relevant laws.
CENTRAL EXCISE TRIBUNAL
These courts though being primarily administrative in nature, yet they hear the
Appeals and revisions emanating from the judgments and orders of the subordinate
officers of the department, under the provisions of the Central Excise Act and other
relevant laws.
SALES TAX TRIBUNALS
These courts though being primarily administrative in nature, yet they hear the
Appeals and revisions emanating from the judgments and orders of the
subordinate officers of the department, under the provisions of the Sales Tax and
other relevant laws of both the union government as well as various state
governments.
CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS COURTS
These Courts are only in the Presidency Towns of Mumbai, Chennai and Kolkata,
and are primarily Civil Courts of original jurisdiction of higher monetary valued
suits, however these courts have also been given powers of certain appeals against
its subordinate small causes courts. The sessions courts are primarily Criminal

Courts, with jurisdiction to revise the orders from the subordinate metropolitan
magistrates as well as to try serious offences, as prescribed by law.
ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL
These tribunal try only the Claims of the victims of various road and rail accidents.
Though there are very few rail Accident tribunals, however there is generally at
least one Motor Accident Claims Tribunals in every district. These courts have a
completely different Court Fees structure compared to those of the regular civil
courts of original jurisdiction.
REVENUE TRIBUNALS AND OTHER SUBORDINATE REVENUE
COURTS
There are various revenue Tribunals and other subordinate revenue Appellate
bodies in the administrative hierarchy of the Revenue Departments of various
State Governments to hear the matters pertaining to the land revenue and other
relevant laws of various states.
SPECIAL COURTS
The governments from time to time also appoint certain Special Courts to try
particular matters deemed to be very important for public life, and for
expeditiously trying these matters, which are mainly treated as very grave and
heinous compared to the actual charges of sections framed against the persons
tried, mainly as leading public enemies. There are also other courts not subordinate
to any of the High Courts, but where only a writ may lie before the High Court or
only to the Supreme Court.
ADMINSITRATIVE TRIBUNALS
The Central Government as well as the State Governments have set up various
administrative tribunals for the purpose of conducting various disciplinary
actions against their senior and other employees, as well as for their grievance
redressal. These tribunals work under special laws framed, and form an
hierarchical pattern for the conduct of their business.

MILITARY AND OTHER SUBORDINATE COURTS

These Courts also known for their procedure called Court Marshall, are made in
the administrative hierarchy of the army, navy and air force of the nation under
various acts governing them individually, and are completely separated from any
other procedure or court, though still well within the four corners of the national
constitution.
THE JUDICIARY
The Indian judiciary has a reputation of being independent and nonpartisan.
Judges are not appointed on political considerations. They enjoy a high standing in
society.

Structure of Indian Legal System

Under our Constitution there is a single integrated system of courts for the Union
as well as the States, which administer both union and state laws, and at the head
of the system stands the Supreme Court of India. Below the Supreme Court are the
High Courts of different states and under each high court there are subordinate
courts, i.e., courts subordinate to and under the control of the High Courts.

The Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court is the highest court of law in India. It has appellate jurisdiction
over the high courts and is the highest tribunal of the land. The law declared by the
Supreme Court is binding on all small courts within the territory of India. It has the
final authority to interpret the Constitution. Thus, independence and integrity, the
powers and functions and judicial review are the issues of utmost importance
concerned with the Supreme Court.

Composition and Appointments

The Supreme Court consists of the Chief Justice of India and not more than
twenty-five other judges. There can be ad hoc judges for a temporary period due to

lack of quorum of the permanent judges. However, Parliament has the power to
make laws regulating the constitution, organisation, jurisdiction and powers of the
Supreme Court. The Constitution makes it clear that the President shall appoint the
Chief Justice of India after consultation with such judges of the Supreme Court and
of High Courts as he may deem necessary. And in the case of the appointment of
other judges of the Supreme Court, consultation with the Chief Justice, in addition
to judges is obligatory.
Once appointed, a judge holds office until he attains 65 years of age. He may
resign his office by writing addressed to the President or he may be removed by the
President upon an address to that effect being passed by a special majority of each
House of the Parliament on grounds of proved misbehaviour and incapacity.
The salaries and allowances of the judges are fixed high in order to secure their
independence, efficiency and impartiality. The Constitution also provides that the
salaries of the judges cannot be changed to their disadvantage, except in times of a
financial emergency. The administrative expenses of the Supreme Court, the
salaries, allowances, etc, of the judges are charged on the Consolidated Fund of
India.
In order to shield the judges from political controversies, the Constitution
empowers the court to initiate contempt proceedings against those who impute
motives to the judge in the discharge of their official duties. Even the Parliament
cannot discuss the conduct of a judge except when a resolution for his removal is
before it.

Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has vast jurisdiction and its position is strengthened by the fact
that it acts as a court of appeal, as a guardian of the Constitution and as a reviewer
of its own judgements. Article 141 declares that the law laid down by the Supreme
Court shall be binding on allcourts within the territory of India. Its jurisdiction is
divided into four categories:
a) Original Jurisdiction and Writ Jurisdiction
Article 131 gives the Supreme Court exclusive and original jurisdiction in a
dispute between the Union and a State, or between one State and another, or
between group of states and others. It acts, therefore, as a Federal Court, i.e., the
parties to the dispute should be units of a federation. No other court in India has the
power to entertain such disputes.

Supreme Court is the guardian of Fundamental Rights and thus has non-exclusive
original jurisdiction as the protector of Fundamental Rights. It has the power to
issue writs, such as Habeas Corpus, Quo Warranto, Prohibition, Certiorari and
Mandamus. In addition to issuing these writs, the Supreme Court is empowered to
issue appropriate directions and orders to the executive. Article 32 of the
Constitution gives citizens the right to move to the Supreme Court directly for the
enforcement of any of the Fundamental Rights enumerated in part III of the
Constitution.
b) Advisory Jurisdiction
Article 143 of the Constitution vests the President the power to seek advice
regarding any question of law or fact of public importance, or cases belonging to
the disputes arising out of pre-constitution treaties and agreements which are
excluded from its original jurisdiction. This jurisdiction does not involve a lis, the
advisory opinion is not binding on the government, it is not executable as a
judgmente of the court and the court may reserve its opinion in controversial
political cases as in the Babri Masjid case.
c) Appellate Jurisdiction
The Supreme Court is the highest court of appeal from all courts. Its appellate
jurisdiction may be divided into
i) cases involving interpretation of the Constitution - civil, criminal or otherwise
ii)civil cases, irrespective of any Constitutional question, and
iii) Criminal cases, irrespective of any Constitutional question.
Article 132 provides for an appeal to the Supreme Court by the High Court
certification, the Supreme Court may grant special leave to the appeal. Article 133
provides for an appeal in civil cases, and article 134 provides the Supreme Court
with appellate jurisdiction in criminal matters. However, the Supreme Court has
the special appellate jurisdiction to grant, in its discretion, special leave appeal
from any judgement, decree sentence or order in any case or matter passed or made
by any court or tribunal.
d) Review Jurisdiction
The Supreme Court has the power to review any judgement pronounced or order
made by it. Article 137 provides for review of judgement or orders by the Supreme
Court wherein, subject to the provisions of any law made by the Parliament or any
rules made under Article 145, the Supreme Court shall have the power to review
any judgement pronounced or made by it.
However, the Supreme Court jurisdiction may be enlarged with respect to any of
the matters in the Union List as Parliament may by law confer. Parliament may, by

law, also enlarge or can impose limitations on the powers and functions exercised
by the Supreme Court. Since Parliament and the Judiciary are created by the
Constitution; such aforesaid acts must lead to harmonious relationship between the
two, and must not lead to altering the basic structure of the Constitution. Moreover,
all these powers can also be suspended or superceded whenever there is a
declaration of emergency in the country.

High Courts:
There shall be High Court for each state (Article 214), and every High Court shall
be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court including the
power to punish for contempt of itself (Article 215). However, Parliament may, by
law, establish a common High Court for two or more states and a Union Territory
(Article 231). Every High Court shall consist of a Chief Justice and such other
judges as the President may from time to time deem it necessary to appoint.
Provisions for additional judges and acting judges being appointed by the President
are also given in the Constitution. The President, while appointing the judges shall
consult the Chief Justice of India, the Governor of the State and also the Chief
Justice of that High Court in the matter of appointment of a judge other than the
Chief Justice. A judge of a High Court shall hold office until the age of 62 years. A
judge can vacate the seat by resigning, by being appointed a judge of the Supreme
Court or by being transferred to any other High Court by the President. A judge
can be removed by the President on grounds of misbehavior or incapacity in the
same manner in which a judge of the Supreme Court is removed.

Jurisdiction of High Courts

The jurisdiction of the High Court of a state is co-terminus with the territorial
limits of that state. The original jurisdiction of High court includes the enforcement
of the Fundamental Rights, settlement of disputes relating to the election to the
Union and State legislatures and jurisdiction over revenue matters. Its appellate
jurisdiction extends to both civil and criminal matters. On the civil side, an appeal
to the High Court is either a first appeal or second appeal.

The criminal appellate jurisdiction consists of appeals from the decisions of:
a) a session judge, or an additional session judge where the sentence is of
imprisonment exceeding 7 years
b) an assistant session judge, metropolitan Magistrate of other judicial Magistrate
in certain certified cases other than petty cases.
The writ jurisdiction of High Court means issuance of writs/orders for the
enforcement of Fundamental Rights and also in cases of ordinary legal rights. High
Court also has the power to superintend all other courts and tribunals, except those
dealing with armed forces. It can also frame rules and issue instructions for
guidance from time to time with directions for speedier and effective judicial
remedy. High Court also has the power to transfer cases to itself from subordinate
courts concerning the interpretation of the Constitution. However, the Parliament,
by law, may extend the jurisdiction of a High Court to, or exclude the jurisdiction
of a High Court from, any Union Territory. High Courts power of original and
appellate jurisdiction is also circumscribed by the creation of Central
Administrative Tribunals, with respect to services under the Union and it has no
power to invalidate a Central Act, rule, notification or order made by any
administrative authority of the Union.

Subordinate Courts:
The hierarchy of courts that lie subordinate to High Courts are referred to as
subordinate courts. It is for the state governments to enact for the creation of
subordinate courts. The nomenclature of these subordinate courts differs from state
to state but broadly there is uniformity in terms of the organisational structure.
Below the High Courts, there are District Courts for each district, and has appellate
jurisdiction in the district. Under the district courts, there are the lower courts such
as the Additional District Court, Sub Court, Munsiff Magistrate Court, Court of
Special Judicial Magistrate of II class, Court of Special Judicial Magistrate of I
class, Court of Special Munsiff Magistrate for Factories Act and labour laws, etc.
Below the subordinate courts, at the grass root level are the Panchayat Courts
(Nyaya Panchayat, Gram Panchayat, Panchayat Adalat, etc.).
These are, however, not considered as courts under the purview of the criminal
courts jurisdiction.
District Courts can take cognisance of original matters under special status. The
Governor, in consultation with the High Court, makes appointments pertaining to
the district courts. Appointment of persons other than the District Judges to the

judicial service of a state is made by the Governor in accordance with the rules
made by him in that behalf after consultation with the High Court and the State
Public Service Commission.
The High Court exercises administrative control over the district courts and the
courts subordinate to them, in matters as posting, promotions and granting of leave
to all persons belonging to the state judicial service.

Place of Indian Legal System

Three mainstreams join together to form the Indian legal system. That of the
common law is perhaps the most dominant among them. Then there is the stream
of laws springing from religion. The third is that of the civil (Roman) law. Trickles
of customary laws cherished by tribal societies and other ethnic communities also
flow into the main stream. The common law is dominant because many of the
concepts and most of the judicial techniques are of common law origin.

State and Non-State Legal System

Paton said that a mature system of law normally sets up that type of legal order
known as the State, but we cannot say a priori that without the State no law can
exist. Nor should we assume that in mature systems all law is State law.
Non-State law and Non-State legal systems such as tribal laws, family laws and
other local laws subsist and even flourish at various levels along with the State law
and the State legal system. However, unlike the State legal system where
legislation is the dominant source of law, in Non-State legal system the custom still
continues to be main source of law.

Conclusion
Modern nation-state functions through a set of institutions. Parliament, the
judiciary, executive apparatus such as bureaucracy and the police, and the formal
structures of union state relations as well as the electoral system are the set of
institutions constituted by the idea of constitutionalism. Their arrangements,
dependencies and inter-dependencies are directly shaped by the meta politico-legal
document- i.e., Constitution.
The legal system derives its authority from the Constitution and is deeply
embedded in the political system; the presence of judiciary substantiates the theory
of separation of power wherein the other two organs, viz. legislature and executive
stand relatively apart from it. Parliamentary democracy works on the principle of
fusion of power, and in the making of law, there is direct participation of the
legislature and the executive, it is the judiciary that remains independent and strong
safeguarding the interests of the citizens by not allowing the other organs to go
beyond the Constitution. It acts, therefore, as a check on the arbitrariness and
unconstitutionality of the legislature and the executive. Judiciary is the final arbiter
in interpreting constitutional arrangements. It is in fact the guardian and conscience
keeper of the normative values that are authoritatively allocated by the state. The
nature of the democracy and development depends much on how the legal system
conducts itself to sustain the overall socio-economic and political environment.
Indian judiciary is a single integrated system of courts for the union as well as the
states, which administers both the union and state laws, and at the head of the
entire system stands the Supreme Court of India. The development of the judicial
system can be traced to the growth of modern-nation states and constitutionalism.
During ancient times, the concept of justice was inextricably linked with religion
and was embedded in the ascriptive norms of socially stratified caste groups. Caste
panchayats performed the role of judiciary at the local level, which was tied up
with the religious laws made by the monarchs. Most of the Kings courts dispensed
justice according to dharma, a set of eternal laws rested upon the individual duty
to be performed in four stages of life (ashrama) and status of the individual
according to his status (varna). The Kings power to make laws depended on the
religious texts and the King had virtually no power to legislate on his own
initiative and pleasure. Ancient state laws were largely customary laws and any
deviation from it or contradiction from dharma was rejected by the community.
In medieval times, the dictum King can do no wrong was applied and the King
arrogated to himself an important role in administering justice. He became the
apostle of justice and so the highest judge in the kingdom. Perhaps, the theory of

institutionalism guided justice, manifesting gross arbitrariness and

authoritarianism.The judiciary must find ways and means to clear burgeoning
pending cases. In this judiciary, as an organisation, needs specialisation and
differentiation in order to solve the cases. Lok Adalats and tribunals must be made
more effective. Judiciary must appoint judges on merit basis and all adhocism must
go. As the Tenth Law Commission has suggested, Constitutional Courts and the
zonal courts of appeals may be constituted. A working democracy requires an
independent judiciary well co-ordinated by an effective executive and a
responsible legislature.

References
Jurisprudence and Legal Theory by Dr. N.V. Paranjape
Jurisprudence (Legal theory) by Prof. Nomita Aggarwal
www.legslservices.india.com
wikipedia.org