IMPORTANCE OF JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS IN INDIA

ABSTRACT

In India Judiciary works as an independent body. Judges decide matters with impartiality and by properly following the principles of law. So, the judgment provided by higher Courts is given utmost importance in case of deciding any matter that is of national importance. The Judgments of the higher judiciary are also binding on all the subordinate courts within Indian territory. This is known as the Precedent system. Judicial Precedents given by the higher judiciary are binding on the lower courts and they can take guidance while deciding similar matters from the previous rulings in the form of precedents.

In this article, the author tried to explain the precedent system, its inception, merits, and demerits of the system in simple words that will surely help in understanding the Judicial Precedent system in India.

KEYWORDS

Judiciary, Precedents, Legislature, Court system

INTRODUCTION

The judiciary is regarded as the third most important organ of governance. In our country when the legality and constitutionality of a matter is questioned then the apex Court’s verdict on that matter becomes final. Making of law is mainly the domain of the legislative but when cases come before the Court where particularly no law is there, the judiciary makes guidelines and those are given importance until the legislature makes a specific law. As the judiciary’s decision is so pertinent for the people of India it should have a binding authority as well otherwise stability of the court system will be questioned. The lower court should give the ruling of the higher judiciary importance otherwise it will be time-consuming for courts to decide similar matters every time in those scenarios Doctrine of Judicial Precedents becomes paramount which says that in case a new matter comes before a court that is already decided by the higher courts in similar matters the lower courts will resolve the matter by taking guidance from the previous judgment.

HISTORY OF PRECEDENTS

Judicial Precedent is not a novel concept for India it has evolved and shaped the Indian subcontinent through its different landscapes over time. It has its inception from the ancient times of Ved and Dharma sutras after that different kingdom ruled India and they used Judicial precedents for their benefits. During the Colonial period, Britishers introduced their law-making system which is known as the Common Law system. The British East India Company introduced the precedent system in 1726 through the establishment of the Mayor’s Court. The Government of India Act, of 1935 mentions the precedent system under Article 212 which says all the lower courts are bound to follow the judgments of Privy Council and Federal Courts.

After independence, the precedent system is continued in the Indian Constitution, 1950 by inserting Article 141[1]. Judgments and laws made by the apex Court should be followed by all the subordinate courts within the Indian territory. However, the Supreme Court is not bound by its previous rulings if it can be proved that the older judgment holds some error and it is necessary to change the verdict for the welfare of the citizens.[2]

DEFINITIONS OF JUDICIAL PRECEDENTS

Generally, Precedent is a legal Principle that is established by the higher courts, provides guidance, and helps to decide the outcome of similar cases to the subordinate courts. Sometimes court’s judgment is regarded as a source of law as it provides the contours for deciding similar matters.

Let’s see some scholarly definitions.

Salmond says that ‘Precedent is the making of law by the recognition and application of new rules by the courts themselves in the administration of justice’.

As per Gray ‘Precedent covers everything said or done, which furnishes a rule for subsequent practice’

According to Keeton ‘A judicial precedent is judicial to which authority has in some measure been attached’.[3]

NATURE OF PRECEDENTS

Precedents should always follow the principles of the Constitution it cannot be ultra vires to the Constitution.
Precedents should follow the settled rule of law.
Precedents should go simultaneously with the established rules it cannot substitute them.
Through Precedent judges do not have the power to create new guidelines or change the established laws every time, precedent can only be used to fill the lacunas in existing laws.[4]

TYPES OF PRECEDENTS

Precedents can be of different types. Those are-

1. Authoritative Precedent– precedents that are binding on the lower courts are authoritative in nature. The subordinate courts have no option but to follow the rulings of the higher courts. Supreme Court’s judgment is an authoritative precedent for all the lower courts because those courts have no discretion to deny it.

Authoritative Precedents can be classified into two types-

Absolute Authoritative Precedent– rules, and decisions of the higher courts that are already settled are regarded as absolutely authoritative. The lower courts are obliged to follow that.
Conditional Authoritative Precedent– some authoritative precedents are binding in nature but can be disregarded under certain exceptional circumstances. But before overruling those judgments the lower should show that the precedent is not in congruence with the reasoning and principles of law.

2. Persuasive Precedent– persuasive precedents are not binding upon the lower judiciary. They are not obliged to follow those rulings. The lower courts can use their discretionary power to decide how much importance they will give to a particular precedent while deciding a matter.

DOCTRINE OF STARE DECISIS

The doctrine of Stare Decisis comes from the Latin Maxim Stare decisis et non quieta movere which means “to stand by decisions and not disturb the undisturbed”.

Lower courts should oblige the precedents rather than deciding those matters afresh. The doctrine of Stare Decisis is regarded as the principle of precedents that says that lower courts should respect the rulings of the higher courts while dealing with similar types of cases. The whole judgment of a particular case does not become precedent. The part that explains the basis of the legislation depending upon which the matter is decided is known as Precedent.

The precedents are important for establishing the court’s stability and keeping people’s faith in the judiciary. Otherwise, similar types of cases once decided by a particular judge can be changed in the opinion of a new judge in those cases people cannot be able to keep faith in the judgments of the court because they can change subjectively based on different judges’ analyses.

Some people opine that as the Judiciary is independent every judge has the authority to decide matters by themselves and following previous orders can be interruptive in their power. But, taking guidance from already decided matters does not interfere with the judge’s independent authority. The precedent only establishes the predictability and consistency of similar matters.[5]

RATIO DECIDENDI

The part of the judgment that analyses the law based on which the court reaches a judgment is known as the rule of law or Ratio Decidendi. In this part, the judges express their reason for deciding a matter in a particular way. This part of the judgment becomes binding on the subordinate courts as a precedent. So, the rule or principle that the court enacted for concluding a matter is Ratio Decidendi.

In the case of Donoghue v Stevenson[6], the court laid down a principle that in case of negligence on the part of the manufacturer, he would be directly liable to the ultimate user irrespective of the connectivity between both parties. This principle becomes the ratio decidendi in this case.

OBITER DICTA

Obiter dicta are part of the judgments that are not binding as a precedent. It means things said by the way. Before providing actual judgment judges sometimes discuss various points, and they give their opinion on those things are obiter dicta. Obiter Dicta is not central to any kind of legal analysis these are discussions, analyses, and points that help the courts to reach a particular point.

In England’s legal system, obiter dicta have no binding effect on the coordinate courts and the subordinate courts. India’s position regarding obiter dicta is not the same as England’s system. In India, the obiter dictum of the Supreme Court has a binding effect on the High Courts and Subordinate Courts within the territory of India.

In Mohan Das v Sattanathan[7], Justice Chugla said that.

After the Independence Supreme Court has substituted the privy council from its place. So, the amount of importance that was given to the obiter dicta of the privy council should also reciprocate with the Supreme Court. In order to maintain stability and uniformity of the judgments of the higher judiciary Supreme Court’s judgment will have a binding effect on all courts.

IMPORTANCE OF RATIO DECIDENDI AND OBITER DICTA IN PRECEDENTS

Ratio Decidendi forms the basis of precedents. The law upon which the court comes to any decision is Ratio Decidendi. It is binding on the subordinate courts. Subordinate Courts when get a similar case that is already decided by the higher courts they can use the previous judgment as a guidance. Ratio Decidendi also helps to clarify different legal principles that guide people to understand legal principles.

Though obiter dicta are not binding on the lower courts are not binding in nature, sometimes the opinions given by distinctive jurists are also given importance for future decisions as those statements are considered legally important.

MERITS OF LEGAL PRECEDENT

Legal precedents provide certainty in law as a matter already decided by the court and are used as guidance for deciding similar matters that increase the certainty of the court’s judgment and save the court’s time.
Precedents provide flexibility in static laws. As the judges give opinions based on the economic, and social values of society the laws also mold contemporary society.
Precedents guide the judges in deciding matters this way it prevents judges from any type of prejudices and committing any kind of mistakes. When the judiciary remains certain in its judgment it strengthens people’s confidence in the judiciary.
Having precedents is also convenient for the lower courts as it saves the labor of judges and legal officials as they do not have to decide the matter afresh, they can rely upon a believable source.

Judicial importance plays an important role in delivering free and fair justice. As the precedents bring flexibility to the law, make judgments certain, and also work as a guiding principle it is pertinent for the growth of the judicial system.[8]

DEMERITS OF LEGAL PRECEDENT

In a case that is decided with the help of precedents, there can be overlooking of authorities as there are so many judgments present it can be overwhelming to find out the right cases.
When cases are decided based on precedents there may remain some points that are not similar to the old case in those circumstances some points of the new case remain unadjudicated.
In some cases, if the higher judiciary has provided erroneous judgment that creates confusion among subordinate courts, and the justice delivery system is affected because of that.
Society is changing every day so for the present-day cases if the courts only rely on past judgments, then it can hinder the development of law. Old judgments can also be regarded as rigid and outdated as they do not change with the varying needs of society.[9]

CONDITIONS THAT ARE WEAKENING THE BINDING FORCES OF PRECEDENTS

Ignorance of a statute– if any court gives any decision in ignorance of any law or statute that can weaken the forces of precedents.
Inconsistency with earlier decisions– when a higher court gives any decision in ignorance that the matter is already decided, then as there are incongruence between two judgments those are not binding on subordinate courts, and the lower courts can decide which decision they will follow.
The decision of Equally divided courts– when a court becomes equally divided in the time of deciding any matter then the subordinate court’s decision on which the appeal was filed remains as precedent.
Abrogation of Precedent by Statutes- after passing a judgment by the courts when the legislature makes any statutes that explicitly or implicitly abrogate the decision in those cases the judgment loses its binding force.
Reversal or Overruling of a Judgment– when a decision given by lower courts is appealed in a higher court and the higher court provides a decision that is not consistent with its previous judgment on a similar case that can create confusion regarding which one will be denoted as a precedence. In these circumstances, the binding nature of precedents weakens.[10]

CASE LAWS THOSE ARE IMPORTANT FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF PRECEDENTS

Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum(1985)[11]

In this case, a 73-year-old woman called Shah Bano has been married for 40 years and got divorced from her husband by Triple Talaq. The Husband also refused to give her lifetime maintenance as it was not needed as per their religious law. The Supreme Court in this case ruled that the wife is entitled to get maintenance for a lifetime under section 125 of CrPc irrespective of their religion. In this case, the court for the first time advocated for implementing the Uniform Civil Code in the Country.

This case upholds the rights of Muslim women and it is regarded as a precedent for future cases.

M C Mehta v Union of India(1996)[12]

This case is regarded as the most important case regarding environmental matters in India. This case was a result of several incidents of polluted matters leaking from the industries that were causing loss of lives and environmental pollution. The Supreme Court in this case ruled that the hazardous industries are directly responsible to people in case any loss has happened to the common people because of the industries’ fault. Those industries are absolutely liable for their acts irrespective of any measure taken by them. This ruling has greater importance in all the similar cases related to it.

Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995)[13]

In this case, a person married under the Hindu Marriage Act, of 1955 converted to Islam to validate his second marriage. In this case, the court held that a marriage solemnized under the Hindu Marriage Act can only be dissolved under specific legal procedures. Conversion to another religion does not automatically make the first marriage null and void. So, the person will be punished for Bigamy under section 494 of IPC.

Vishaka & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan(1997)[14]

In this case, a social activist in Rajasthan has stopped a child marriage incident in her village. The relatives of the girl gang-raped the activist. The police were not cooperating with the lady. The lower court acquitted all the offenders. The High Court held that the act of gang rape happened for taking revenge on the activist. Later the matter reached to Supreme Court when various PILs were filed.

The Court held that having a safe working environment for women is their fundamental right under Articles 14, 19, and 21 which provide the right to equality, the right to freedom of speech and expression, and the right to life and personal liberty. There should be a proper mechanism in every workplace to prevent such cases. The court also defined the term sexual harassment in a broader perspective.

Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India(2018)[15]

In this case, the petitioner a member of the LGBTIQ community filed a petition before the Supreme Court on the contention that the right to sexuality and the right to choose a sexual partner is a right provided under Article 21 is the Right to life with dignity.

The court in this case partially struck down Article 377 whereby they upheld the right of the LGBTIQ community to have consensual sex between same-sex partners. The court also clarified that the State has nothing to do with a person’s right to choose their partner irrespective of their sexuality. The Court’s judgment in this case has provided equal rights to all people regardless of their identity and sexual orientation.

CIRCUMSTANCES THAT ARE INCREASING THE AUTHORITY OF PRECEDENTS

In present times as important matters are getting decided by a large number of benches that increases the importance of those judgments and strengthens the binding effect of precedents.
Most of the time the higher judiciary decides any case having an odd number of judges on the bench. So, there is no instance of losing the binding effect of the judgment for equal division of opinion among judges.
When the legislature passes any law based on a precedent the authority of the precedent increases in those cases.

CONCLUSION

Judicial precedence is given equal importance with the legislative’s power as a source of law. Precedents carry a great amount of importance in litigation it saves the court’s precious time and labor of deciding similar matters every time afresh. The precedents also save the judges from making any mistake as they have binding authority. It increases the certainty of the judgment given by a court and increases people’s faith in the workings of the judiciary.

But as we know no system is at fault proof problems also exist within these systems as well. Sometimes the old judgments become rigid and inflexible with the changing needs of the society. The judiciary needs to take steps to overcome these faults. The Precedent system that continued from ancient times still holds importance in today’s law-making system.

REFERENCES

INDIA CONST. art. 141.
Sprash Agrawal, Doctrine of Precedent, IPLEADERS, (Nov. 2, 2024, 7:19 PM) https://blog.ipleaders.in/scope-and-application-of-the-doctrine-of-precedents-under-article-141-of-the-constitution/
Princy A.F, Importance Of Judicial Precedent – A Comparative Analysis, LEGAL SERVICE INDIA, (Nov. 2, 2024, 7:21 PM) https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-4751-importance-of-judicial-precedent-a-comparative-analysis.html
Tushitta Murali, Judicial Precedent is a Source of Law, IPLEADERS, (Nov. 2, 2024, 7:23 PM) https://blog.ipleaders.in/judicial-precedent-source-law/
Donughue v Stevenson (1932, AC 562)
Mohan Das v Sattanathan AIR 1954, 56 BOMLR1156
Priyan Garg, Precedent As A Source of Law, ACADEMIKE, (Nov. 2, 2024 07:32 PM) https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/precedents-as-a-source-of-law/
Sprash Agrawal, Doctrine of Precedent, IPLEADERS, (Nov. 2, 2024, 7:19 PM) https://blog.ipleaders.in/scope-and-application-of-the-doctrine-of-precedents-under-article-141-of-the-constitution/
Mohd. Ahmed Khan vs Shah Bano Begum And Ors AIR 1985 SC 945
M.C. Mehta vs Union Of India & Ors AIR 1996 SUPREME COURT 1977
Smt. Sarla Mudgal, President, Kalyani & … vs Union Of India & Ors AIR 1995 SC 1531
Vishaka & Ors vs State Of Rajasthan & Ors AIR 1997 SUPREME COURT 3011
Navtej Singh Johar vs Union Of India Ministry Of Law And … AIR 2018 SUPREME COURT 4321

[1] INDIA CONST. art. 141.

[2] Sprash Agrawal, Doctrine of Precedent, IPLEADERS, (Nov. 2, 2024, 7:19 PM) https://blog.ipleaders.in/scope-and-application-of-the-doctrine-of-precedents-under-article-141-of-the-constitution/

[3] Princy A.F, Importance Of Judicial Precedent – A Comparative Analysis, LEGAL SERVICE INDIA, (Nov. 2, 2024, 7:21 PM) https://www.legalserviceindia.com/legal/article-4751-importance-of-judicial-precedent-a-comparative-analysis.html

[4] Tushitta Murali, Judicial Precedent is a Source of Law, IPLEADERS, (Nov. 2, 2024, 7:23 PM) https://blog.ipleaders.in/judicial-precedent-source-law/

[5] Tushitta Murali, Judicial Precedent is a Source of Law, IPLEADERS, (Nov. 2, 2024, 7:23 PM) https://blog.ipleaders.in/judicial-precedent-source-law/

[6] Donughue v Stevenson (1932, AC 562)

[7] Mohan Das v Sattanathan AIR 1954, 56 BOMLR1156

[8] Priyan Garg, Precedent As A Source of Law, ACADEMIKE, (Nov. 2, 2024 07:32 PM) https://www.lawctopus.com/academike/precedents-as-a-source-of-law/

[9] Ibid

[10] Sprash Agrawal, Doctrine of Precedent, IPLEADERS, (Nov. 2, 2024, 7:19 PM) https://blog.ipleaders.in/scope-and-application-of-the-doctrine-of-precedents-under-article-141-of-the-constitution/

[11] Mohd. Ahmed Khan vs Shah Bano Begum And Ors AIR 1985 SC 945

[12] M.C. Mehta vs Union Of India & Ors AIR 1996 SUPREME COURT 1977

[13] Smt. Sarla Mudgal, President, Kalyani & … vs Union Of India & Ors AIR 1995 SC 1531

[14] Vishaka & Ors vs State Of Rajasthan & Ors AIR 1997 SUPREME COURT 3011

[15] Navtej Singh Johar vs Union Of India Ministry Of Law And … AIR 2018 SUPREME COURT 4321

Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is personal.