Category: polity

What’s Stare Decisis? Unlocking Legal Precedent’s Power

The doctrine of stare decisis is Latin for “to stand by things decided.” It is a fundamental principle in common law legal systems. This includes India. It mandates that courts adhere to previous judicial decisions, or precedents, when resolving similar cases. This doctrine promotes consistency, predictability, and fairness in the application of law.

Origin

The origins of stare decisis can be traced back to medieval England. During this period, judges often relied on custom and tradition to resolve disputes. However, as the legal system evolved, judges began to recognize the importance of consistency. They understood the need for predictability in the application of law. They started to cite previous decisions as authority for their rulings, laying the foundation for the doctrine of stare decisis.

Colonial Influence and Indian Adoption

The British colonial era played a significant role in the spread of common law principles. These principles reached various parts of the world, including India. As the British colonized India, they introduced their legal system, which was based on English common law. This included the doctrine of stare decisis.

The Indian Constitution, which came into force in 1950, formally adopted the doctrine of stare decisis. Article 141 of the Constitution states that “the law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding.” It applies to all courts within the territory of India. This ensures Supreme Court’s decisions are binding on all lower courts. This maintains uniformity in law interpretation and application.  

The core rationale behind stare decisis is to ensure:

  1. Consistency: Similar cases should be treated similarly, preventing arbitrary or discriminatory decisions.
  2. Predictability: Individuals and businesses can plan their actions with confidence, knowing the likely legal consequences.
  3. Efficiency: Courts can rely on established legal principles, reducing the need for extensive re-litigation.
  4. Public Trust: Adherence to precedent strengthens public confidence in the judiciary.

Precedent

A precedent is a judicial decision. It serves as an authority for resolving subsequent legal cases with similar facts and issues. In simpler terms, it is a past ruling used as a guide for future decisions. Precedents form the foundation of common law legal systems, including India. They play a crucial role in ensuring consistency. They also ensure predictability and fairness in the application of law. They are categorized based on their binding force and persuasive authority:

  1. Binding Precedent: Decisions of higher courts are binding on lower courts within the same jurisdiction. For example, in India, Supreme Court decisions are binding on all High Courts and lower courts.
  2. Persuasive Precedent: Decisions from other jurisdictions or lower courts can be persuasive but are not strictly binding. Courts may consider these decisions to support their arguments or to gain insights into legal issues.

The Components of a Precedent

A precedent comprises several key elements:

  1. Ratio Decidendi: The core legal principle or reasoning underlying the decision.7 It forms the binding part of the precedent.
  2. Obiter Dictum: Non-essential remarks or observations made by the judge, which are not binding but may be persuasive.
  3. Per Incuriam: Decisions made in ignorance of relevant laws or precedents, which are not binding.
  4. Sub Silentio: Decisions made without explicit discussion of a particular legal issue, which lack binding authority.

Stare Decisis in India

Article 141 of the Indian Constitution enshrines the doctrine of stare decisis. This makes Supreme Court judgments binding on all courts within India. This ensures uniformity in the interpretation and application of law across the country.

Exceptions to Stare Decisis

While stare decisis is a powerful tool, it is not absolute. Courts may depart from precedent in certain circumstances:

  1. Per Incuriam Decisions: Decisions made in ignorance of relevant laws or precedents.
  2. Sub Silentio Decisions: Decisions made without explicit reasoning.
  3. Obiter Dictum: Non-binding remarks or observations.
  4. Legislative Overrides: Parliament can enact laws that supersede judicial decisions.
  5. Erroneous Precedents: Courts may overrule incorrect or outdated precedents.

The Doctrine of Prospective Overruling

This doctrine allows courts to overrule a precedent without affecting past decisions based on it. It balances the need for legal development with the principle of certainty.

Landmark Cases on Stare Decisis in India

  1. Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985): This case reaffirmed that Supreme Court decisions are binding. This remains true even in sensitive areas like personal law.
  2. State of U.P. v. Synthesis & Chemicals Ltd. (1991): The Court clarified that not all Supreme Court decisions are binding.
  3. Suganthi Suresh Kumar v. Jagadeesan (2002): High Courts cannot overrule Supreme Court decisions.
  4. Pandurang Kalu Patil v. State of Maharashtra (2002): High Court decisions are binding on subordinate courts.
  5. Paramjit Kaur v. State of Punjab (2021): The Supreme Court’s authority to evolve legal principles was emphasized.

The Importance of Stare Decisis

Stare decisis plays a crucial role in maintaining the stability and predictability of the legal system.It ensures that similar cases are treated similarly, reducing uncertainty and promoting justice.14 By following precedent, courts can efficiently resolve disputes and avoid unnecessary litigation.

However, it is essential to recognize that the doctrine is not rigid. Courts must be willing to depart from precedent when necessary, such as when a precedent is clearly erroneous or outdated. This flexibility allows the law to evolve and adapt to changing societal needs.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the doctrine of stare decisis serves as a cornerstone of the Indian legal system. By adhering to precedent, courts ensure consistency, predictability, and efficiency in the application of law. This promotes public trust in the judiciary and facilitates the smooth functioning of society.

However, stare decisis is not without its limitations. The doctrine must be balanced with the need for legal evolution. Courts must have the flexibility to depart from precedent when it is demonstrably erroneous or outdated. The exceptions and doctrines like prospective overruling allow for this necessary flexibility.

Looking ahead, the power of precedent will be crucial. It will maintain a stable and predictable legal system in India. However, courts must remain vigilant in ensuring that stare decisis does not stifle legal progress. Through careful analysis, the doctrine can uphold the rule of law. A willingness to adapt when necessary also ensures justice for all.

The ECI’s Role in Protecting and Preserving Electoral Democracy


Heart and soul of our Indian constitution i.e. preamble that declares. India to be democratic and republic. All of us who are working for protection and upholding the civil rights of the citizens of the nation are intensely connected with the democratic party of the country . Democracy is one of the basic features of the constitution as held in the famous case of INDRA GANDHI V/S RAJ NARAYAN AIR 1975 SC 2299. Political decision is the contrivance through which a cutting edge stage makes among the citizens a sense of involvement and active participation in all the public affairs. It is through the norms and ceremonies that the authority of government combined with legitimacy and peaceful deliberate change of power to the new leaders is made sure of. Purity and opportunity of political role can be guaranteed provided that the appointive administration is the basic foundation of democracy and is placed beyond the compass of party government.
ELECTION word has its one of the symbolic representations that denotes the active participation of the people to make a government for them. All the voters by voting and franchise share their will and their changing expectations from the government and the kind of ideology. Voters are the main element of democracy and free and fair elections as they are the real stakeholders they vote for after analysing which can bring better development to the country . so on the day of august 15 1947 contesting free and fair election was one of the major tasks at that time. According to article 289 of the draft constitution. Later changed to article 324 and then for setting up the independent election commission was made effective under article 4 to 9.
Election is the process of choosing a person by voting for any post or office. According to representation of the people act 1951 election to fill a seat in either of the house of parliament or state this word has been mentioned or used in part XV of the indian constitution. One of the most essential elements was free and fair election . Regular election at regular intervals and in a fair manner is a part of basic structure of the constitution as the court held in the famous case of T.N. SHESHAN V/S UOI AIR 1995 SC 852. Election commission is the guardian of the free and fair election. So before every election the election commission issues guidelines for the code of conduct of political parties and their candidates . There are various examples where violations can be observed in the code of conduct responsible for the violation for their controversial remark in the campaign of Gujarat election 2017. In LD SYSTEMS V/S CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER AIR 2006 KER 229 Kerala high court held that this limitation on the freedom is to ensure the free and fair election and the commission has the power to draw force under article 324of indian constitution.
There was an important process of registration of parties initiated from 1989 even the election commission of india has restricted the use of money that cannot be done to reduce the malpractices. In a case of registered society v/s UOI , it was pointed out that , in India, elections are fought on money. The court held that purity of election is the main component of democracy and the commission can ask political parties for details of the expenditure incurred by them and for what purpose there is a bar to the court for interference in the electoral matter? But when this state came then the question arises in everyone’s mind that if the commission is a tribunal . mainly held in the case of APHL conference , shillong v/s W.A. sangama and loud speaker for campaign is valid as decided in mohinder singh v/s chief election commissioner.
Criminalisation of politics is a huge and deep problem in India. In 2003, a law was passed that stated no to elections of criminal legislative bodies . however the same issue was continued as this is a deep rooted issue. Various laws were made as a candidates need to submit their affidavit, acquittal charges pending cases etc. all the information must be clearly informed to the public . clearly stated in UOI v/s association of democratic reform that the election commission shall take all the required info and they must scrutinize it and reject it if not competent to elect the election.if any information provided is not correct then the candidate can be penalized. The concept of negative voting came into existence in the case of PUCL v/s UOI (2003) 4 SCC 399 Where people can cast the negative votes and the politicians were included under the ambit of article 19 (1)(a).
At last but not least it must be acknowledged that the election commission of India has been considered as a main responsible body for preserving and protecting the electoral democracy . Democracy as defined by abraham lincoln is completely justified only due to the constitution body like election commission that holds regular and free and fair elections and fulfills the dreams of our constitutional maker by ensuring the active participation of its citizens. Election commission can be called as a safeguard of democracy in true spirit.

THANK YOU