ABSTRACT

This study is to highlight independence of judiciary in the constitution of India

and political nature of judicial process. Doctrine of power of separation is defined
very well by distribution of powers between Legislature, Executive and the
Judiciary in our constitution.

The Indian judiciary act as watchdog and to check on the executive and the
legislature that they are within their constitutional limit or not. This task is
completed only when the judiciary is itself independence so here the main
purpose is to see whether Indian judiciary is independence and to what extent
judicial process have influence by political environment.

A study to find out need, benefit, issues and challenges regarding independence
of judiciary. The study would help to understand independence and restriction on
the judiciary for a proper functioning democratic system, the independency of
judiciary and the political nature of judicial process.

1
 BACKGROUND OF SEMINAR

Importance of Independence of the judiciary is very important facet of the

democracy, like our country. Independence of judiciary can be achieved by
prohibiting interference from the Government (i.e. legislature and executive). In
a democratic set up only an impartial and independence judiciary can protect the
rights of person and society.

It is a well-known fact that the independence of the judiciary is the basic can
provide justice without fear or favour. Therefore, it is Important that all the
judicial system (i.e. Supreme Court, High Court and District Court/ Lower Court)
should be allowed to perform its function without any pressure. In a democratic
country like India judiciary is custodian of rights of citizens. Therefore the
framers of the Indian Constitution at the time of framing of our constitution were
concerned about the kind of judiciary our country should have. This concern of
the members of the constituent assembly was responded by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar
in the following words:

"There can be no difference of opinion in the House that our judiciary must be
both independent of the executive and must also be competent in it. And the
question is how these two objects can be secured”.

The Indian Constitution though it does not accept the strict doctrine of separation
of powers vouches for an independent judiciary both at the national level and in
the States.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. What are the components of Independence of Judiciary?

2. What are the relevant case laws related to the provisions of Independence
of Judiciary?

2
3. What is Judicial Process?
4. What is the political nature of Judicial Process

OBJECTIVES OF THE SEMINAR

1. To study whether legislature and executive interfere in the matter of

Judiciary.
2. To study the Judicial Process.
3. To study the political nature of the Judicial Process

3
 INTRODUCTION

The framers of the Indian Constitution at the time of framing of our constitution
were concerned about the kind of judiciary our country should have. According
to Dr. Ambedkar, "There can be no difference of opinion in the House that our
judiciary must be both independent of the executive and must also be competent
in itself and the question is how these two objects can be secured".

In order to secure the stability and prosperity of the society the guaranteeing the
fundamental rights and the independence of the judiciary to guard and enforce
those fundamental rights is very essential. Also, in a country like India for
ensuring a free society the independence of the judiciary is of utmost importance.
An independent judiciary is essential for a free and fair society under the rule of
law which in tum is responsible for good governance of the country can be
secured through unbiased judiciary.

The three organs of the state, Legislature, Executive and the Judiciary, are well
demarcated by the doctrine of Separation of Powers. It provides for a
responsibility to the judiciary to act as a watchdog and to check whether the
executive and the legislature are functioning within their limits under the
constitution and not interfering in each other’s functioning. This supervisory task
given to the judiciary cannot be carried on unless the judiciary is not independent
in itself. An independent judiciary supports the base of doctrine of separation of
powers to a large extent.

Independence also envisages the restrictions that must be imposed on the

judiciary as an institution and on the individual judges that forms a part of the
judiciary. This concept is a smooth blend of both the independence and restriction
on the judiciary for a proper functioning democratic system.

4
MEANING

The constitution does not define the independence of judiciary, but yet provides
for it. It is basically based upon the doctrine of separation of powers which holds
its existence from several years. The doctrine of separation of powers talks of the
independence of the judiciary as an institution from the executive and the
legislature.

Different scholars have tried to define judiciary by talking about the

independence of the judges which constitute judiciary. Therefore, the
independence of the exercise of the functions by the judges in an unbiased manner
i.e. free from any external pressure, the independence of judiciary includes the
independence of judges that are a major part of the judiciary

NEED FOR THE INDEPENDENCE OF THE JUDICIARY

The basic need for the independence of the judiciary rests upon the following
points:

1. KEEP A CHECK ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE ORGANS OF THE

GOVERNMENTAL MACHINERY:
Judiciary acts as a watchdog by ensuring that all the organs of the state
function within their respective areas and according to the provisions of the
constitution. Judiciary acts as a guardian of the constitution and also aids
in securing the doctrine of separation of powers.
2. INTERPRETING THE PROVISIONS OF THE CONSTITUTION:
It was well known to the framers of the constitution that in future the
ambiguity will arise with the provisions of the constitution so they ensured
that the judiciary must be independent and self-competent to interpret the
provision of the constitution in such a way to clear the ambiguity but such an

5
 interpretation must be unbiased i.e. free from any pressure from any organs
like executive.
If the judiciary is not independent, the other organs may pressurize the
judiciary to interpret the provision of the constitution according to them.
Judiciary is given the job to interpret the constitution according to the
constitutional philosophy and the constitutional norms.
3. DISPUTES REFERRED TO THE JUDICIARY:
It is expected of the Judiciary to deliver judicial justice and not partial or
committed justice. By committed justice we mean to say that when a judge
emphasizes on a particular aspect while giving justice and not considering all
the aspects involved in a particular situation. Similarly, judiciary must act in
an unbiased manner.

CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS - THE INDEPENDENCE

OF THE JUDICIARY

The constitution expressly and implied provides for independence of the

judiciary. These provisions are as follows:

1. SECURITY OF TENURE:

The judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts have been given the security
of the tenure. Once appointed, they continue to remain in office till they reach the
age of retirement which is 65 years in the case of judges of Supreme Court as per
Article -124(2) and 62 years in the case of judges of the High Courts as per article
Article - 217(1) of the constitution.

They cannot be removed from the office except by an order of the President and
that too on the ground of proven misbehaviour and incapacity A resolution has
also to be accepted to that effect by a majority of total membership of each House

6
of Parliament and also by a majority of no less than two third of the members of
the house present and voting

2. SALARIES AND ALLOWANCES:

The salaries and allowances of the judges is also a factor which makes the judges
independent as their salaries and allowances are fixed and are not subject to a
vote of the legislature.

They are charged on the Consolidated Fund of India in case of Supreme Court
judges and the Consolidated Fund of state in the case of High Court judges. Their
emoluments cannot be altered to their disadvantage as provided under Article -
125(2) except in the event of grave financial emergency.

3. POWERS AND JURISDICTION OF SUPREME COURT:

Parliament can only add to the powers and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court but
cannot curtail them.

In the civil cases, Parliament may change the pecuniary limit for the appeals to
the Supreme Court. Parliament may enhance the appellate jurisdiction of the
Supreme Court. It may confer the supplementary powers on the Supreme Court
to enable it work more effectively. It may confer power to issue directions, orders
or writs for any purpose other than those mentioned in Article - 32.

These powers of the Supreme Court are of permanent nature and cannot be taken
away thereby securing the independence of the judiciary.

4. THE CONDUCT OF THE JUDGES ARE NOT OPEN TO DISCUSSION

IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE/PARLIAMENT:

As provided by the Article – 211, there shall be no discussion in the legislature of

the state with respect to the conduct of any judge of Supreme Court or of a High
Court in the discharge of his duties.

7
 A similar provision is made in Article - 121 which lays down that no discussion
shall take place in Parliament with respect to the conduct of the judge of Supreme
Court or High Court in the discharge of his duties except upon a motion for
presenting an address to the President praying for the removal of the judge.

5. THE POWER TO PUNISH FOR CONTEMPT OF COURT:

Both the Supreme Court and the High Court have the power to punish any person
for their contempt. Article - 129.

6. SEPARATION OF THE JUDICIARY FROM THE EXECUTIVE:

According to article 30 "the state shall take steps to separate the judiciary from
the executive in the public services of the state. The object behind it being the
ensuring of the independence of the judiciary.

JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE IN LANDMARK CASES

• One of the most significant cases in asserting judicial independence was

Indira Gandhi v. Raj Narain (1975), where the Allahabad High Court
declared Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister of India, guilty of electoral
malpractice. The decision marked a bold stance against the executive,
ensuring that no one, not even the Prime Minister, is above the law. This case
highlighted the judiciary’s role in keeping the executive in check and
maintaining democratic principles.
• Another landmark case was Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record
Association v. Union of India (2015), where the Supreme Court struck down
the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act. The NJAC
sought to place control over the appointment of judges in the hands of the
executive. The Court held that this would undermine the independence of the
judiciary and ruled that the Collegium system should continue. This decision

8
reinforced the importance of judicial independence in the judicial appointment
process.

CHALLENGES TO JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE

Despite the constitutional safeguards, judicial independence in India faces
several challenges. Political pressure, judicial corruption, lack of transparency
in judicial appointments, and inadequate security for judges are some of the
major threats to the independence of the judiciary.

POLITICAL PRESSURE
The judiciary’s independence is often challenged by political pressures,
especially when it comes to high-profile cases. Governments may attempt to
influence court decisions, either directly or indirectly, to further their political
interests. While the judiciary in India has largely managed to maintain its
independence, there have been instances where external pressures have
compromised its functioning.

JUDICIAL CORRUPTION
Judicial corruption is another significant challenge that affects the credibility
and independence of the judiciary. Instances of bribery and corruption within
the judicial system undermine public trust and weaken the judiciary’s
authority. The Indian government has taken steps to address judicial
corruption, such as setting up the National Judicial Appointments Commission
and implementing measures for accountability.

LACK OF TRANSPARENCY IN JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS

The process of judicial appointments, while carried out by the Collegium, has
been criticized for its lack of transparency. There have been calls for reforms
in the Collegium system to ensure that judicial appointments are based on
9
 merit rather than personal connections or political affiliations. Some legal
experts argue that the system needs to be more transparent to ensure that the
judiciary remains free from external influences.

INADEQUATE SECURITY FOR JUDGES

Judges in India face threats to their safety, particularly when dealing with
sensitive or controversial cases. Judges who rule against powerful individuals
or groups may be subject to threats or even physical harm. The safety of judges
is a critical issue that needs immediate attention, as it directly impacts their
ability to carry out their duties impartially.

INDEPENDENCE OF JUDICIARY AND POLITICS

The executive has to be separate from the judiciary otherwise the political
influence on the judiciary will render only injustice and there would be a conflict
of interest on the basic level. However, while political affiliation has undoubtedly
played some role in judicial appointments, it is far from clear whether this has
actually undermined judicial independence.

Judges enjoy strong constitutional guarantees against improper pressure or

intimidation from government. This ensures that the judges will not become
influenced by the people who appoint him. Yet, there is still a strong argument
that judges should be appointed based on merit alone and that this would seem to
support a system of appointment through some form of expert agency rather than
via the political process.

Judicial appointment should be separate from party-political affiliation. Judges

are, in reality, responsible for developing the law which in turn is very much
related to fundamental "political" questions about the nature of justice and
injustice, the distribution of power and opportunity in society, and so on. Thus,

10
the evaluation of judicial candidates is not quite like selecting engineers or
physicists but is in fact somewhat "political",

Judges and other court personnel need to be able to make decisions free from
interference from the State and the private sector so as to prevent the corruption
of the judicial process. The independence of the judiciary is therefore crucial to
its effectiveness. But independence is not enough. A fair judiciary must also be
subject to mechanisms that hold it accountable to the people. The challenge is to
design appropriate institutional structures and legal culture that uphold the
independence, impartiality and integrity of the judiciary, while rendering it
answerable for its decisions.

Independence implies that judges' careers do not depend on pleasing those with
political and economic power. Such separation of powers is necessary both to
prevent politicians from interfering with judicial decision-making and to stop
incumbent politicians from targeting their political opponents by using the power
of civil and criminal courts as a way of sidelining potential challengers.

The judiciary needs to be able to distinguish strong, legitimate cases from those
that are weak or politically motivated. Otherwise, the public and users of the court
system will lose credibility.

CONCLUSION:

Judicial independence is a pre-requisite to the rule of law and fundamental

guarantee of a fair trial. Thus, the independence of the judiciary got an eminent
position as far as the institution of judiciary is concerned. It’s shown from the
constitutional provision the judiciary is directly or indirectly appointed through
executive head called the President. The President is a political factor. And it is
also emerged by the Judiciary that the executive is also important functionary in
the appointment of the judiciary and its participation in the appointment
11
procedure is also basic structure of the constitution. The judiciary needs to able
to distinguish strong, legitimate cases from those are weak or politically
motivated. Judicial Accountability and Judicial Independence have to work hand
to ensure the real purpose of setting up of the constitution.

12
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

• DR. SHEETAL KANWAL. JUDICIAL PROCESS

• https://lawbhoomi.com/independence-of-judiciary-in-
india/#Constitutional_Framework_for_Judicial_Independence
• https://blog.ipleaders.in/independence-indian-judiciary-demonstrated-relevant-
rulings/#The_Rafale_deal_case
• https://www.drishtijudiciary.com/editorial/independence-of-judiciary

13