Meet Justice M.M. Punchhi and his Notable Judicial decisions
- ByPravleen Kaur --
- 17 Jun 2025 --
- 0 Comments
Justice Punchhi was known for his deep expertise in constitutional, civil, and criminal law. He authored 142 judgments and sat on 776 benches during his Supreme Court tenure. His approach combined respect for constitutional principles with a pragmatic understanding of the law’s role in society. After retirement, he chaired the Punchhi Commission on Centre-State relations, which made significant recommendations on federalism and governance.
Landmark Judgments
1. Second Judges Case (Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, 1993)
Justice Punchhi is especially remembered for his dissent in this landmark case that established the Collegium system for judicial appointments. While the majority favored a collective decision-making process among senior judges, Punchhi argued that the Chief Justice of India should have primacy in appointments, with consultation from other judges being optional. His view highlighted the unique constitutional position of the CJI and influenced subsequent debates on judicial appointments.
2. State of Tamil Nadu v. State of Karnataka (Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal)
In this case, the bench addressed whether the Cauvery Water Disputes Tribunal could grant interim relief despite no explicit statutory provision. Justice Punchhi held that the Tribunal had such power, interpreting legislative intent and the need for effective dispute resolution between states. This judgment was significant for federal water disputes and the scope of tribunal powers.
3. Nelson Motis v. Union of India
Justice Punchhi clarified that criminal proceedings and departmental proceedings are inherently distinct and independent. Thus, acquittal in a criminal court does not automatically nullify departmental inquiries. He upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 10(4) of the Central Civil Services Rules, reinforcing the autonomy of disciplinary proceedings.
4. Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Manubhai D. Shah
Here, Justice Punchhi held that the right to respond to criticism in state-controlled publications is integral to freedom of expression. He emphasized that when the state censors or refuses to publish content, it must provide legally valid reasons, reinforcing transparency and accountability in state media.
Legacy
Justice M.M. Punchhi’s brief tenure as Chief Justice was marked by his principled stands on judicial independence, federalism, and the rights of individuals. His dissent in the Second Judges Case remains influential in ongoing debates about judicial appointments. As chair of the Punchhi Commission, he contributed to shaping Centre-State relations in India, leaving a lasting mark on constitutional law and governance.
RELATED Blog
0 comments