Article 135 of the Costitution of India with Case law
🔹 Article 135 of the Constitution of India – Jurisdiction and powers of the Federal Court under existing law to be exercisable by the Supreme Court
📘 Bare Text of Article 135
"Until Parliament by law otherwise provides, the Supreme Court shall also have jurisdiction and powers with respect to any matter to which the provisions of Article 133 or Article 134 do not apply if jurisdiction and powers in respect of that matter were exercisable by the Federal Court immediately before the commencement of this Constitution."
🔍 Explanation and Key Features
Article 135 is a transitory provision.
It grants the Supreme Court the same jurisdiction and powers as were held by the Federal Court of India (which existed before 1950) on matters not covered under:
Article 133 – Civil appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
Article 134 – Criminal appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court.
It ensures no vacuum in judicial powers during the transition from the Federal Court (pre-Constitution) to the Supreme Court (post-Constitution).
Parliament is empowered to alter or abolish this jurisdiction by law.
🔹 Background Context
Before the Constitution came into effect (26 January 1950), Section 205 of the Government of India Act, 1935 established the Federal Court.
Article 135 ensures that the jurisdiction of the Federal Court is preserved under the new system until Parliament legislates otherwise.
⚖️ Important Case Laws on Article 135
1. M. S. M. Sharma v. Shree Krishna Sinha, AIR 1960 SC 1186
Issue: Conflict between parliamentary privileges and freedom of the press.
Relevance: The Court exercised jurisdiction under Article 135, since the issue was not specifically covered by Articles 133 or 134.
Observation: SC confirmed it had inherent jurisdiction inherited from the Federal Court.
2. Mohammed Khan v. State of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1970 SC 991
Issue: Appeal in criminal matter not satisfying Article 134 requirements.
Held: Court held that Article 135 cannot be invoked to override specific limitations under Article 134.
Significance: Article 135 cannot be used to expand appellate jurisdiction in criminal cases if Article 134 does not allow it.
3. State of Uttar Pradesh v. Rajesh Gautam, (2003) 5 SCC 531
Issue: Criminal case appeal—whether appeal could be entertained under Article 135.
Held: Jurisdiction under Article 135 is limited and subject to Articles 133 & 134.
Principle: Article 135 is a residuary provision, not an alternative appellate jurisdiction.
📝 Summary Table
| Aspect | Details |
|---|---|
| Applies to | Matters not covered by Article 133 (civil) or 134 (criminal) |
| Purpose | Preserve Federal Court’s jurisdiction under the Constitution |
| Jurisdiction Granted To | Supreme Court of India |
| Until when | Until Parliament legislates otherwise |
| Nature | Transitional and residuary in nature |
✅ Conclusion
Article 135 ensures that no gaps were left in judicial authority after the transition from the British-era Federal Court to the Supreme Court of India. It preserves legacy jurisdiction until Parliament decides otherwise. However, it cannot be used to expand appellate rights where specific constitutional articles (like 133 or 134) do not permit.
RELATED Blog
0 comments