Exploring Constitutional Rights: An In-depth Discussion on Articles 131 to 136 of the Indian Constitution

Exploring Constitutional Rights: An In-depth Discussion on Articles 131 to 136 of the Indian Constitution

Introduction:

The Indian Constitution, adopted in 1950, is a comprehensive document that guarantees fundamental rights and outlines the powers and functions of various institutions. Among its numerous provisions, Articles 131 to 136 are of significant importance as they deal with the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court and the distribution of powers between the Union and the States. This article aims to delve into these provisions and explore their practical implications through relevant case laws.

Article 131: Original Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court:

Article 131 grants the Supreme Court exclusive jurisdiction over disputes arising between the Government of India and one or more States or between States themselves. The Court acts as an arbiter in such cases and its decision is final. In the landmark case of State of Karnataka v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2002), the Supreme Court invoked Article 131 to adjudicate a water dispute between the two states. This case exemplified the significance of the Supreme Court's role in resolving inter-state disputes.

Article 132: Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court:

Article 132 empowers the Supreme Court to hear appeals against the judgments, decrees, or orders of any court or tribunal in India. This jurisdiction extends to civil, criminal, or other matters, provided substantial questions of law are involved. The case of Keshav Mills Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1965) illustrated the scope of the Supreme Court's appellate jurisdiction and reaffirmed its authority to interpret and apply laws.

Article 133: Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in Civil Matters:

Under Article 133, the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear civil appeals from High Courts if the case involves a substantial question of law of general importance. The case of S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981), popularly known as the "Judges' Transfer case," established the Supreme Court's power to hear appeals from High Courts in constitutional matters, thereby affirming its role as the guardian of the Constitution.

Article 134: Appellate Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in Criminal Matters:

Article 134 grants the Supreme Court appellate jurisdiction over criminal matters. The Court can entertain appeals from High Courts if it involves a substantial question of law or if a death sentence has been imposed. In the case of Mohd. Arif v. Supreme Court of India (2014), the Supreme Court highlighted the importance of Article 134 while considering an appeal against a death sentence, reiterating its duty to ensure justice and safeguard individual rights.

Article 135: Jurisdiction and Powers of the Federal Court Under Existing Law:

Article 135 confers upon the Supreme Court all the jurisdiction and powers enjoyed by the Federal Court immediately before the commencement of the Constitution. The Federal Court, which existed prior to the adoption of the Constitution, played a crucial role in interpreting constitutional issues. This provision ensures the smooth transition and continuity of judicial powers.

Article 136: Special Leave to Appeal by the Supreme Court:

Article 136 grants the Supreme Court discretionary power to grant special leave to appeal against any judgment, decree, determination, sentence, or order in any cause or matter. This provision enables the Court to intervene in cases of exceptional importance or injustice. The case of Mohd. Yunus v. Mohd. Mustaqim (2013) elucidated the broad discretionary powers of the Supreme Court under Article 136 and reinforced the principle of access to justice.

Conclusion:

Articles 131 to 136 of the Indian Constitution outline the jurisdiction and powers of the Supreme Court, ensuring an effective system of justice. Through landmark cases and relevant examples, we have explored the practical implications of these provisions. The Indian judiciary, led by the Supreme Court, has consistently interpreted and applied these provisions to safeguard the rights and interests of individuals, resolve disputes, and uphold the principles enshrined in the Constitution.

The Supreme Court's exclusive jurisdiction under Article 131 ensures the resolution of complex inter-governmental and inter-state disputes. By invoking this provision, the Court acts as an impartial adjudicator, as demonstrated in the State of Karnataka v. State of Andhra Pradesh (2002) case. This case involved a water dispute between the two states, highlighting the Supreme Court's pivotal role in maintaining harmony and fairness in matters of national importance.

Article 132 grants the Supreme Court the power of appellate jurisdiction. This provision enables the Court to hear and decide appeals against judgments, decrees, or orders of any court or tribunal in India. In the case of Keshav Mills Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (1965), the Supreme Court exercised its appellate jurisdiction, emphasizing its authority to interpret and apply laws consistently and accurately.

When it comes to civil matters, Article 133 empowers the Supreme Court to hear appeals from High Courts if they involve substantial questions of law of general importance. The case of S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981) marked a significant moment in Indian jurisprudence. Referred to as the "Judges' Transfer case," it solidified the Supreme Court's power to hear appeals from High Courts in constitutional matters, thus reasserting its role as the guardian of the Constitution.

In criminal matters, Article 134 provides the Supreme Court with appellate jurisdiction. The Court can entertain appeals from High Courts if they involve substantial questions of law or if a death sentence has been imposed. The case of Mohd. Arif v. Supreme Court of India (2014) exemplified the significance of Article 134 in ensuring justice. It underscored the Court's duty to thoroughly examine cases involving death sentences to guarantee fair trials and protect individual rights.

Article 135 ensures the seamless transition of powers from the Federal Court, which existed prior to the adoption of the Constitution, to the Supreme Court. This provision empowers the Supreme Court with all the jurisdiction and powers that the Federal Court possessed. By incorporating the existing legal framework, the Constitution ensures continuity and consistency in judicial proceedings.

Lastly, Article 136 grants the Supreme Court discretionary power to grant special leave to appeal against any judgment, decree, determination, sentence, or order. This provision enables the Court to address exceptional cases where fundamental rights or substantial questions of law are involved. The case of Mohd. Yunus v. Mohd. Mustaqim (2013) shed light on the expansive discretionary powers of the Supreme Court under Article 136, reinforcing the principle of access to justice and the Court's responsibility to correct grave errors or miscarriages of justice.

In conclusion, Articles 131 to 136 of the Indian Constitution delineate the jurisdiction and powers of the Supreme Court, ensuring the effective functioning of the judicial system. Through landmark cases and relevant examples, we have explored the practical implications of these provisions. The Indian judiciary, led by the Supreme Court, has consistently employed these constitutional provisions to protect the rights of citizens, maintain the rule of law, and preserve the integrity of the Indian Constitution.