Article 124 of the Costitution of India with Case law
📘 Article 124 of the Constitution of India – Establishment and Constitution of the Supreme Court
🔹 Text of Article 124 (As Amended):
Article 124(1): There shall be a Supreme Court of India consisting of a Chief Justice of India and, until Parliament by law prescribes a larger number, of not more than seven other Judges.
Article 124(2):
Every Judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the President after consultation with such of the Judges of the Supreme Court and of the High Courts as the President may deem necessary.
In the case of appointment of a Judge other than the Chief Justice, the Chief Justice of India shall always be consulted.
Article 124(3): A person shall not be qualified for appointment as a Judge of the Supreme Court unless:
(a) He is a citizen of India, and
(b) (i) has been a Judge of a High Court (or two or more in succession) for at least 5 years, or
(ii) has been an advocate of a High Court(s) for at least 10 years, or
(iii) is, in the opinion of the President, a distinguished jurist.
Article 124(4): A Supreme Court Judge can be removed only by the President on the grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity, after a motion passed by both Houses of Parliament with a special majority.
Article 124(5): Parliament may by law regulate the procedure for presentation of an address and for the investigation and proof of the misbehaviour or incapacity.
🧾 Summary:
Article 124 lays down the foundation of the Supreme Court of India, its composition, appointment qualifications, and removal procedures of its judges. It has been central in debates around judicial independence and appointment mechanisms.
⚖️ Important Case Law on Article 124:
🧑⚖️ 1. S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981) Supp SCC 87 (First Judges Case)
Held that the President is not bound by the advice of the Chief Justice in judicial appointments.
“Consultation” does not mean “concurrence.”
Gave executive primacy in appointments.
🧑⚖️ 2. Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Assn. v. Union of India (1993) 4 SCC 441 (Second Judges Case)
Overruled the First Judges Case.
Held that the term “consultation” in Article 124 means concurrence.
Primacy of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) in appointments established.
Introduced the Collegium system (CJI + 2 senior-most SC judges).
🧑⚖️ 3. Re: Special Reference 1 of 1998 (Third Judges Case)
Expanded the Collegium to CJI + 4 senior-most judges.
Reinforced judicial primacy in appointments and transfers.
🧑⚖️ 4. Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Assn. v. Union of India (2016) 5 SCC 1 (Fourth Judges Case)
Struck down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act as unconstitutional, holding that it violated the independence of the judiciary and the basic structure doctrine.
🧑⚖️ 5. K. Veeraswami v. Union of India (1991) 3 SCC 655
Held that no FIR can be registered against a sitting judge of the SC/HC without prior permission of the CJI.
Aimed at protecting judicial independence.
📝 Key Points:
Appointments: President appoints judges in consultation with senior judiciary, now governed by the Collegium system.
Qualifications: Must be an Indian citizen, with prescribed judicial or advocacy experience, or be a distinguished jurist.
Removal: Can only be done by impeachment — a rare and rigorous process.
Judicial Independence: Central to the interpretation of Article 124 in all major cases.
RELATED Blog
0 comments