The Benches of Supreme Court of India is not only required but now it is a need of India or Indian Judicial System. As recommended by the Law Commission, it is necessary to establish at least 4 more benches, Zone-wise and also one bench in the centre of India. It certainly not only help to provide effective and speedy disposal of cases but also all type of aggrieved persons can come to the court of Law.
By
G G Murkute, Associate/Sr. Associate , Private
| 03 30 2010 17:49:03 +0000
consider the proposal in the light of words used in the Preamble of the Constitution "to secure to all citizens....Justice social,economic and political" A single superior court to secure justice in these terms fails. Socially because alot changes from chennai to delhi be it language or culture, and Economically due to travel costs and high fees to take or engage a new lawyer in Delhi. It is pertinent to note the proposal maintains the integrity of the superior court at delhi because it provides for a Constitutional Bench at Delhi and Four Benches in four metros to deal with litigation in appeals as a matter of convenience. This should not be disputed.
By
purushottam awasthi, LLM student, Faculty of Law Lucknow University, Lucknow
| 03 10 2010 08:30:13 +0000
i support Ajay's humor for benches.........you can make additional benches or do not go ahead with benches ......but the primary objective is about our lethargic judicial system ; its laws since adam's time .......new lifestyles have sprung up and new challenges in the society have come up but our legal system is rock solid not willing to move an inch. would like to have better opinions
By
Manish Grover, Account Manager , Impressico Business Solutions Pvt Ltd
| 02 02 2010 08:46:46 +0000
|
It is quite obvious that if the people who framed Constitution intended such a scheme, there would have been some 20 odd benches of Supreme court in all the States of Union instead of their respective High courts. The fundamental safeguard of justice is Hierarchy of courts. From courts of fact at the lower level to courts of fact and law and then Courts examining substantial questions of law alone. The contrary argument is as plausible, if one employs an analogy, that a company can have multiple Registered offices instead of branch offices for convenience across geographies. Or for that matter, stretching the argument logically, the Indian Parliament should have Sessions across the country to suit geographical expedience and satiation of regional sentiments. The Supreme court is the last resort of safeguarding fundamental rights and constitution and owes its existence to Constitution like a company does to Companies Act. As one cant have multiple Registered offices without infringing a mere statute, contemplation of distributing Supreme court for popular convenience is against the Scheme of that fountainhead called Indian Constitution from which all laws emanate and are adjudicated under it by the Supreme court against the fleeting fickleness of populism. Interestingly though United Kingdom now has a Supreme court and it would be a such a mess if one wants U.S Supreme Court to have benches from Alaska to Utah. I wonder whether the Indian Law ministry needs a revamp instead of the other way round.Lastly it is the very concept of Geographical centralisation with the college of Justices from all parts of the country in a milieu far from local and regional considerations that had made Supreme Court what it is today. And by the way, a mere telegram from the remotest part of India to Chief Justice of India had paved way for important and land mark Public interest litigation affecting constitutional rights and continues to do so even today despite New Delhi being distant. Geographically speaking of course
By
avaneendra mudigonda, legal Counsel, MVN
| 02 01 2010 19:03:02 +0000
|