Indian Judiciary - An Independent Institution - Evolution, Establishment And Hierarchy
Author: LawSphereX
Category: General Law
Published:
Updated:
INDIAN JUDICIARY: AN INDEPENDENT INSTITUTION -
EVOLUTION, ESTABLISHMENT AND HIERARCHY
M. Shivya Lakshmi, Assistant Professor, VELS School of Law, Vels Institute of Science,
Technology & Advanced Studies (VISTAS), Chennai. Divya. S, Assistant Professor, VELS School of Law, Vels Institute of Science, Technology & Advanced Studies (VISTAS), Chennai.
ABSTRACT
The Indian judicial system, as it exists today, is not a product of sudden creation but the outcome of a long and gradual process of historical evolution. It reflects the cultural, political, and administrative transformations that India has undergone through various epochs—ancient, medieval, colonial, and post-independence. In its earliest stages, justice in India was dispensed through the principles enshrined in the Dharmaśāstras and customary laws, where rulers and local assemblies played significant roles in resolving disputes. The medieval period introduced Islamic legal principles under the Delhi Sultanate and Mughal rule, leading to a fusion of indigenous and external legal traditions.
However, the most profound and lasting impact on the present judicial structure came during British colonial rule, when the British introduced codified laws, established uniform courts, and institutionalized the rule of law through a hierarchical judicial system. The post-independence era marked a new constitutional vision where the judiciary assumed the role of the guardian of fundamental rights and the interpreter of the Constitution of India. The Indian Constitution, which came into force on January 26, 1950, laid the foundation for an independent and integrated judicial framework characterized by equality before law, judicial review, and the separation of powers. The Supreme Court and the High Courts emerged as central institutions ensuring justice and the protection of democratic values.
Today, the Indian judiciary continues to embody both its historical legacy and its constitutional mandate. It stands as a robust pillar of the world’s largest democracy, entrusted with the vital function of administering justice, upholding the rule of law, and maintaining the balance between individual rights and state authority. Thus, the modern judicial system represents a synthesis of India’s long legal evolution and its enduring commitment to justice and equity. Keywords: Hierarchy, Judiciary, institution, Evolution
INTRODUCTION
The Indian Judiciary administers a common law system of legal jurisdiction, in which customs, precedents and legislation, all codify the law of the land. It has in part, inherited the legacy of the legal system established by the then colonial powers and the princely states since the mid- 19th century, and has partly retained characteristics of practices from the ancient and medieval times. There are various levels of judiciary in India – different types of courts, each with varying powers depending on the tier and jurisdiction bestowed upon them. They form a strict hierarchy of importance, in line with the order of the courts in which they sit, with the Supreme Court of India at the top, followed by High Courts of respective states with district judges sitting in District Courts and Magistrates of Second Class and Civil Judge (Junior Division) at the bottom.
Courts hear criminal and civil cases, including disputes between individuals and the government. The judiciary is independent of the executive and legislative branches of government according to the Constitution of India1. The Judiciary interprets the Constitution as its final arbiter. It is its duty as mandated by the Constitution, to be its watchdog, by calling for scrutiny any act of the legislature or the executive, who otherwise, are free to enact or implement these, from overstepping bounds set for them by the Constitution. It acts like a guardian in protecting the fundamental rights of the people, as enshrined in the Constitution, from infringement by any organ of the state. It also balances the conflicting exercise of power between the centre and a state or among states, as assigned to them by the Constitution.
While pronouncing decisions under its constitutional mandate, it is expected to remain unaffected by pulls and pressures exerted by other branches of the state, citizens or interest groups. And crucially, independence of the judiciary has been held to be a basic feature of the Constitution and which being inalienable, has come to mean - that which cannot be taken away from it by any act or amendment by the legislature or the executive. This independence shows up in the following manner: No minister, or even the executive collectively, can suggest any names for appointment as judges, to the President, who ultimately decides on appointing them from a list of names recommended only by the collegium of the judiciary2.
Nor can judges of the Supreme Court or a High Court be removed from office once appointed, unless an overwhelming twothirds of members of any of the Houses of the Parliament back the move, and only on grounds 1 Arvind P. Datar, “Judicial Appointments and the Collegium: A Critical Reappraisal,” 7 National Law School of India Review 115 (2016). 2 Abhinav Chandrachud, “Judicial Independence and the Basic Structure Doctrine,” 58 Journal of the Indian Law Institute 27 (2016).
of proven misconduct or incapacity. A person who has been a judge of a court is debarred from practicing in the jurisdiction of that court. Objectives • To study about the constitution of Courts in India • To learn about the Indian judiciary • To know about the establishment of courts in India. Limitation • The research has been limited to only referring to online sources and books. • The topic is very vast with limited time.
CHAPTERIZATION
The entire study is divided into four chapters including an introduction and a conclusion. Chapter – 1: deals with the introduction Chapter –2: deals with the establishment of Indian judiciary Chapter -3: deals with the Hierarchy of Indian judiciary Chapter – 4: Concludes the paper.
CHAPTER I: HISTORY OF INDIAN JUDICIARY
The present judicial system of India was not a sudden creation. It has been evolved as the result of slow and gradual process and bears the imprint of the different period of Indian history. The period which however, have made the greatest impact on the existing system are those nearest to the present times and it is not surprising that the period preceding and following the down of independence, more particularly that one after the coming into force of the constitution have been the greatest molding factors. Administration of justice is one of the most essential functions of the state.1 If men were gods and angels, no law courts would perhaps be necessary
though even then the skeptics might refer to the quarrels among gods, particularly in the context of goddesses3. As it is, we find that though man may be a little lower than the angels, be has not yet shed off the brute. Not far beneath within the man, there lurks the brute and the brute is apt to break loose on occasions, to curb and control that brute and to prevent degeneration of society into a state of tooth and claw, we need the rule of law. We also need the rule of law for punishing all deviations and lapses from the code of conduct and standard of behavior which the community speaking through its representatives has prescribed as the law of the land. Being human, disputes are bound to arise amongst us.
For the settlement of those disputes, we need guidelines in the form of laws and forums to redress the History of our judicial system takes us to the hoary past when Manu and Brihaspati gave us Dharam Shastras, Narada the Smritis, and Kautilya the Arthshastra4. A study of these memorable books would reveal that we in ancient India had a fairly well-developed and sophisticated system of administration of justice. In broad outlines there is considerable similarity between the system then in vogue and the system now in force. A civil judicial proceeding in ancient India as at present commenced ordinarily with the filing of a plaint or what was known as Purva Paksha before a competent authority. A plaint, it was required, must be brief in words, unambiguous and free from confusion.
In case of disputes about property, elaborate rules laid down the requirement about giving detailed and full description of the property. Written statements known as Uttara Paksha were required to be filed by the defendants and the rules enjoined that they must not be vague and must meet all the points of the plaint. Normally, parties were required to produce their witnesses5. The presence of the witnesses who were far away or would not stir out was secured by the orders of the judge. Different modes of proof for substantiating allegations were prescribed. On the conclusion of the trial, judgment known as Nirnaya was pronounced and the successful party became entitled to Jayapatra or a document of success, Execution of the decrees could entail imprisonment, sale, fine and demand for additional security. The doctrine of res judicata known as Pran Nyaya was well-known.
In criminal law there was an elaborate classification of offences. Apart from offences like rape, dacoity and the like (which may be called conventional offences), there were other offence like not running to the rescue of another person in distress. Punishment was prescribed for causing 3 Pratap Bhanu Mehta, “The Rise of Judicial Governance in the Supreme Court of India,” 38 Boston University International Law Journal 219 (2017). 4 Ujjwal Kumar Singh, “Judicial Activism, PIL and the Changing Role of the Supreme Court,” 59 Journal of the Indian Law Institute 73 (2017). 5 S. Muralidhar, “Access to Justice: Role of Legal Aid and NALSA in India,” 5 Christ University Law Journal 1 (2018)
damage to trees in city parks, to trees providing shades, to trees bearing flowers and fruits and to trees in holy places. It was an offence for a judge to give a wrong decision out of corrupt motive. Perjury by a witness attracted severe penalty. There were six types of punishment, namely, fine, reprimand, torture, imprisonment, death and banishment. Theft was classified into three kinds according to the value of the thing stolen. There was also a classification of thieves. Some were considered open or patent thieves and others secret thieves. Open or patent thieves included traders who employed false weights and measures, gamblers, quacks and persons who manufactured counterfeit articles. Secret thieves were those who moved about clandestinely6. Adultery, according to Shastras, consisted of three categories.
Flirting about with another man's wife, dallying with her clothes or sending her a pimp, being with her in an unfrequented place, or bathing in her company in the same pool or holding conversation with her, with winks, gallantries and smiles passing on both sides, or at any improper time constituted one of the species of adultery and was punishable ordinarily with small fines only. Sending a woman sandalwood, a string of beads, drinks, clothes or gold or jewels was another species of adultery punishable with larger fines. Sleeping together or delaying upon the same carpet or kissing, caressing, or embracing a woman or carrying her into a retired place with her tacit consent was the third and worst species of adultery, punishable with still larger fines. A mediator or gobetween could also be punished with fines; and the woman was not considered exempt from punishment.
Manu prescribed the following oath for parties and witnesses: "Let the Judge cause a Brahmin to swear by his truth or sat, a Kshatriya by his chariot or the animal he rides or by his weapons, a Vaishya by his cattle, grain and gold, and a Shudra by imprecating on his head the guilt of all grievous offences.
" if the idea of oath, according to Bentham, is to have a ceremony composed of words and gestures by which the Almighty is engaged eventually to inflict on the taker of the oath punishment in quantity and quality in the event of his doing something which be engages not to do or omitting to do something which he in like manner engages to do the oath administered in ancient India was perhaps more effective compared to the present lifeless recital of a formula about swearing to speak the truth The system of administration of justice 6 Anup Surendranath, “Criminal Justice Administration in India: Focus on the Victims of Crime,” 60 Journal of the Indian Law Institute 101 (2018).
and laws as we have today is the product of well thought out efforts on the part of the then British Government. No less than four law commissions and other committees were appointed during the years 1834 to 1947 to give shape to the system7. In the matter of succession and other allied matters, the parties were left to be governed by the personal law. Although the impact of the English common law was perceptible in the codified law of India, departure from the common law was also made whenever, it was considered, necessary, to local needs.
In answer to the criticism that the present judicial system is unsuited to the Indian conditions and something alien transplanted on the Indian soil, it may be observed, as stated by the Law Commission, that though some of the changes in the early period of British rule in India were influenced by the system prevailing in England in those days, the changes did not have the effect of ousting the personal laws. No judicial system in any country is wholly immune from, and unaffected by, outside influences, nor can such outside influence be always looked upon as a bane. The laws of a country do not reside in a sealed book; they grow and develop. The winds of change, and the free flow of ideas, do not pass the law idly by.
As has been observed in a report, even in procedural law, which was codified by the foreign rulers in this country, the basic principles of a fair and impartial trial, which were well-known to their predecessors, were adhered to. In the matter of substantive law as well, the British did not wholly bring in the Western concepts. The personal law of the various communities living in this country remained the determining factor in questions like succession, inheritance, marriage, caste, religious institutions, etc. New laws were enacted to provide for matters which were either not fully covered by the indigenous law, or where such laws were not clearly defined and ascertainable, or were otherwise not acceptable to the modern way of thinking.
Such outside influences are, however, an integral part of the historical process of development of thought and institutions all over the world, and once the new concepts get assimilated, they cease to be alien in character. Viewed in this light, it seems hardly correct to say that the present judicial system is a foreign transplant on Indian soil, or that it is based on alien concepts unintelligible to our people. The people have become fully accustomed to this system during more than a hundred years of its existence. The procedures and even the technical terms used by the lawyers and the judges are widely understood by most litigants. The judicial system in essence pertains to the courts and the judges, their hierarchy and mode of functioning. By its 7 Vivek Adharsh, “Virtual Courts: The Forced Evolution of the Indian Justice System,” 2 Bennett Journal of Legal Studies 85 (2021).
very nature, it is inextricably connected with the rule of law. It tells us as to how justice is administered in the land where it is in force8. Coming to the hierarchy of courts, we find that there are courts at different levels- the trial courts, the courts of appeal and sometimes the courts of second appeal. Even amongst the trial courts, there are different categories. Some cases are dealt with by the Munsiffs in some States and by subordinate judges of second or third-class in other States. Suits of higher value are dealt with by subordinate judges or subordinate judges of first class. In some States subordinate judges exercise unlimited jurisdiction in civil suits, while in other States suits of higher valuation are dealt with by district judges or city civil court judges.
In certain metropolitan cities, original jurisdiction for trial of suits beyond particular value is vested in the High Court. Apart from the above, jurisdiction is vested in the court of small causes for trial of certain types of cases in which the pecuniary claim is not very high. On the criminal side, most of the cases are tried by the courts of magistrates. Cases involving serious crimes and attracting severer punishment are dealt with by the court of sessions. In the early Vedic times, we do not find any reference as regards the establishment of judicial procedure. However, the Rigveda gives, for the first time some clue as civil law and it is on this basis that Roth and Zimmer accept the existence of mediator and judge in the early society. Generally, justice was administered by the King’s judges. A clear reference to judicial procedure is available from the time of Brahmans.
But justice was still to be done with the help of the mediator. Ordinarily, a decision was taken on the strength of evidence both oral and documentary that the party may choose to adduce in support of their respective case.
CHAPTER III - HIERARCHY OF COURT
The Indian Constitution is founded upon the doctrine of separation of powers. As per this doctrine there are three organs viz., Legislature, Judiciary and Executive and all these three organs should discharge their functions independently, none should encroach one upon another. Nevertheless, in India, this doctrine is not applicable strictly, but checks and balance theory is applicable. Indian Constitution has adopted the federal system of America, and there exists separate sphere for the Centre and States. Nevertheless, to administer both Union and State laws, the 8 Priya Sharma, “The Indian Justice Delivery System: Pendency, Delay and Structural Challenges,” 44 Library Progress (International) 159 (2024)
Constitution of India provides for a single integrated system of courts. In the hierarchy of the judicial system at the apex there exists Supreme Court of India consisting of a Chief Justice and 25 other justices, appointed by the president. 11 It is constituted as the supreme guardian of the Constitution of India and also the Supreme Guardian as well as the Protector of Fundamental Rights. 12 The High Court stands at the head of the state's judicial administration. Articles 233 to 237 of the Constitution of India deal with subordinate courts9. Different State laws furnish for distinct species of jurisdiction of courts. Each state is divided into judicial districts presided over by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, who is the Principal Civil Court of original jurisdiction and can try all offences including those punishable with death.
He is the highest judicial authority in a district. Below him, there are courts of civil jurisdiction, known in different states as Principal Civil Judge Senior Division, Principal Civil Judge Junior Division, Similarly, criminal judiciary comprises Chief Judicial Magistrate and Judicial Magistrate First Class. The Supreme Court of India Chapter IV of Part V of the Constitution provides about the topic. It is the highest court of the land seated at New Delhi, comprised of one Chief Justice twenty other judges. Every judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the President of India. Qualification to be appointed as judge is that he should be citizen of India, should have been Judge of High Court for at least five years or an advocate of High court for at least 10 years or is in the opinion of the President a distinguished jurist.
The Judge of Supreme Court holds office up to the age of sixty-five years unless he resigns earlier or removed on the ground of proved misbehavior and incapacity. The Supreme Court has original, appellate and advisory jurisdiction. Its exclusive original jurisdiction extends to all disputes between the Union and one or more States or between two or more States. The Indian Constitution confers an extensive original jurisdiction to the Supreme Court to enforce Fundamental Rights.
Appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court can be invoked by a certificate of the High Court concerned or by special leave granted by the Supreme Court in respect of any judgment, decree or final order of a High Court in cases both civil and criminal, involving substantial questions of law as to the interpretation of the 9 Ritu Gupta, “Challenges Afflicting Indian Courts: Backlog, Infrastructure and Reforms,” 10 International Journal for Multidisciplinary Research 1 (2024).
Constitution. The President may consult the Supreme Court on any question of fact or law of public importance under Article 143 for its advisory opinion10. The High Courts Chapter V of part VI of the Constitution contains the provisions regarding the High Court. Each State has a High Court, and is the highest court in that State, and generally the last court of regular appeals. Generally the High Courts are only the courts of Appeal. The High Courts play a very significant role in the scheme of administration of justice. They enjoy civil, criminal, ordinary as well as extraordinary jurisdiction. The High Courts are also termed as the courts of equity. When there is violation of fundamental rights any person may approach the High Court and also for any other rights under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Every High Court is also empowered to supervise over all its subordinate courts falling within jurisdiction under Article
227 of the High Courts are empowered to frame their own rules, and arrange to implement
them. These Courts have the ordinary original civil jurisdiction, under certain provisions of Law. Many times, the High Courts have concurrent jurisdiction in addition to subordinate courts, for effective remedy at the earliest. For the purpose of speedier, cheaper and effective dispensing of justice, some of the High Courts have different division benches in different parts of the respective states. For the of disposal of its business, the Judges in the High Court, either sit singly or in benches of two or more judges for deciding more important matters11. Subordinate courts: Chapter VI under Part VI of the Constitution provides the provisions regarding subordinate courts. Below the High Court there is the Court of District Judge which is top court among subordinate courts.
The appointment, posting and promotion of District Judge are made by the Governor of the concerned State in consultation with the concerned High Court. As regards eligibility for the post of the District Judge, a person not already in the service of the Union or of the State shall only be eligible to be appointed as District Judge if he has been for not less than seven years an Advocate or a Pleader and is recommended by the concerned High Court. Appointments of a person other than District Judges to the judicial service of the State shall be made by the Governor of the State in accordance with rules made by him in that behalf after 10 Maanya Jain, “The Historical and the Present Architecture of the Indian Judiciary,” 3 Indian Journal of Legal Research and Advocacy 45 (2023). 11 P. Sornamugi & T.
Varsha, “Role of the Public in Administration of Justice in India,” 5 Indian Journal of Legal Research and Advocacy 92 (2023).
consultation with concerned State Public Service Commission and with concerned High Court. As regards control over subordinate courts, including the matters of posting, promotion, leave etc. , the concerned High court is vested with the power to have control over subordinate courts but the High court is to exercise the control in accordance with the conditions of service under the law applicable in relation to subordinate courts. The Governor may by public notification direct the application of the provisions of Chapter VI of the Constitution and the rules made there under on any class or classes of magistrates in the concerned State subject to any exception or modification12. Panchayats Part IV of the Constitution embodies the Directive Principles of State Policy.
Under this part, Article 40 lays down that the State shall take steps to organize village Panchayats and endow them such powers and authority as may be necessary to enable them to function as units of selfgovernment. The Panchayats had been discharging judicial functions since ancient time including during British rule. Panchayats are at lowest rung in our judicial system dealing with petty civil and criminals matters through informal and simple procedure with the endeavor to make conciliation or compromise between the parties under disputes. Different State laws had been enacted concerning Nyaya Panchayats having diversities of provisions therein about its composition and power. The Punjab Gram Panchayat Act 1952 was a State Act. This Act was having two tier systems i. e. at lowest level the Gram Panchayats and at upper level the Block Smiti. The same was applicable in Haryana also13.
CHAPTER IV - CONCLUSION
In fact the Indian Judiciary is the custodian of rule of law. Though the legislative and the executive organs furnish strength and continuity to the governance system, it is the judiciary that guard the spirit of the Indian Constitution and ensures the people’s faith in the institutions of polity. Although most times, the higher judiciary is in the news for its landmark and sometimes unconventional and path-breaking judgments, it is the subordinate judiciary that is engaged in a multitude of judicial decisions that affects the common man directly. A vibrant judicial system is a hallmark of greatness of any nation. The Indian judiciary is acclaimed all 12 International Commission of Jurists, “Judicial Independence in India: Tipping the Scale,” ICJ Report 1 (2025) 13 P. Sornamugi & T.
Varsha, “Role of the Public in Administration of Justice in India,” 5 Indian Journal of Legal Research and Advocacy 92 (2023)
over the world for its realistic and dynamic approach. It has identified the basic issues keeping in view the social objectives. Indian Constitution not only assures political justice but also social and economic justice14. By its innovative pronouncements Indian judiciary has brought confidence in the minds if the citizens that there shall be no denial of any political, social or economic justice. A judicial system is a dispute resolution system and it must be recognized as a “service” which provides consumers expeditious and effective resolution of these disputes it offers a mechanism for the enforcement of rights and obligations of individuals, a function which is essential in a functioning polity or for that matter a functioning economy. The judiciary has become almost a law unto itself, answerable to none and under no pressures to reform or change with time.
In India, this model was imposed to supplant traditional rural forms of Indian dispute resolution, which involved respected adjudicators in a more conciliatory, less formal process, and greater flexibility in remedial action. Since backlog and delay, and the continual need for access to justice in Indian society, require adaptations of both modem processes increasingly popular among the international business community and traditional processes better suited to rural society. Indian democracy depends upon the faith of the existence of judicial system. On the other hand, day-by-day it’s going to lose its importance on account of rigidity, expensive, compulsion, uncertainty, delay, and lack of confidentiality, satisfaction, convenience etc. Hence to regain the faith in judicial system it is inevitable to adopt another alternative speedy disposal system.
humane judicial process is an essential foundation of good governance particularly in acountry like ours, committed to the rule of law15. 14 India Justice Report, “India Justice Report 2022: Ranking States on Police, Judiciary, Prisons and Legal Aid,”
1 India Justice Report 1 (2022).
15 R. K. Singh, “A Critical Review of Justice Delivery in India: Delay, Backlog and Reform Imperatives,” 7 Doon Journal of Multidisciplinary Research 55 (2025)