Scribd
Upload
26 views1 page

Position of Supreme Court

The position of the Indian Supreme Court has evolved significantly, initially praised for its wide jurisdiction but often undermined by parliamentary amendments. Landmark judgments like Golaknath and Kesavananda Bharati established the Court's authority to review constitutional amendments, asserting its independence. The Court's controversial decision during the Emergency in ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla raised concerns about judicial independence.

Uploaded by

rmewan30
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
26 views1 page

Position of Supreme Court

The position of the Indian Supreme Court has evolved significantly, initially praised for its wide jurisdiction but often undermined by parliamentary amendments. Landmark judgments like Golaknath and Kesavananda Bharati established the Court's authority to review constitutional amendments, asserting its independence. The Court's controversial decision during the Emergency in ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla raised concerns about judicial independence.

Uploaded by

rmewan30
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

Position of Supreme court: The position of the Indian Supreme Court has evolved

significantly over time, reflecting changes in society, politics, and the legal
landscape. In the initial years of its existence, many writers of the time would
praise the supreme court for having wider jurisdiction than any other superior
court in any part of the world. But a wide jurisdiction does not mean that the
Court is necessarily ‘powerful’.
In the early years of the supreme court, the parliament was able to easily
vitiate decisions of the court through amendments to the Constitution. But
eventually, due to the Landmark judgments such as Golaknath v. State of Punjab
(1967) and Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) affirmed the Supreme
Court's authority to review constitutional amendments and assert its
independence from legislative interference. Then came the emergency period
when the independence of judiciary was put in jeopardy. The Supreme Court's
decision in the case of ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla (1976), where it upheld
the suspension of habeas corpus during the Emergency, was a controversial
moment that later came to be widely criticized.

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy