The Supreme Court of India: Composition, Appointment, Removal of Judges and Procedure under Articles 124 to 147 of the Constitution
The Supreme Court of India is the highest judicial authority in the country and occupies a central position in the constitutional framework of India. It functions as the guardian of the Constitution, protector of fundamental rights, final court of appeal, and interpreter of constitutional provisions. The Supreme Court plays a vital role in maintaining the rule of law, ensuring constitutional supremacy, and preserving the federal structure of the nation.
The provisions relating to the Supreme Court are contained in Articles 124 to 147 of the Constitution of India. These Articles deal with the establishment, composition, appointment, powers, jurisdiction, procedure, and independence of the Supreme Court.
The framers of the Constitution recognized that an independent judiciary is essential for protecting democracy, ensuring justice, and maintaining constitutional governance. Therefore, extensive safeguards were incorporated to secure the independence, dignity, and authority of the Supreme Court.
Article 124 provides for the establishment and constitution of the Supreme Court. It states that there shall be a Supreme Court of India consisting of a Chief Justice of India and such number of other judges as Parliament may by law prescribe.
Originally, the Constitution provided for one Chief Justice and not more than seven other judges. However, with increasing population, litigation, and constitutional responsibilities, Parliament gradually increased the strength of the Court through legislation.
Today, the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court includes the Chief Justice of India and thirty-three other judges.
The Supreme Court is located in New Delhi, although under Article 130, the Chief Justice of India, with approval of the President, may appoint another place or places for sitting of the Court.
The composition of the Supreme Court reflects the need for judicial efficiency, constitutional interpretation, and representation of diverse legal expertise from across the country.
The judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President of India. Article 124(2) states that every judge of the Supreme Court shall be appointed by the President after consultation with such judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts as the President may deem necessary.
In the case of appointment of judges other than the Chief Justice of India, consultation with the Chief Justice of India is mandatory.
Originally, the Constitution intended a consultative process in which the executive possessed the final authority regarding judicial appointments. However, over time, judicial interpretation transformed this process significantly.
The system of judicial appointments evolved through a series of landmark decisions known as the Judges Cases.
In S. P. Gupta v. Union of India, popularly called the First Judges Case, the Supreme Court initially held that the executive had primacy in judicial appointments.
However, this position changed in Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India, known as the Second Judges Case. The Court held that the Chief Justice of India would have primacy in judicial appointments through a collegium system.
The collegium consists of the Chief Justice of India and the senior-most judges of the Supreme Court. The collegium recommends appointments and transfers of judges.
The Third Judges Case further clarified the collegium system and expanded the consultative process among senior judges.
Thus, judicial appointments in India today are largely controlled by the judiciary itself in order to preserve judicial independence.
The Constitution also prescribes qualifications for appointment as a judge of the Supreme Court. A person must be a citizen of India and must have either served as a judge of a High Court for at least five years, or practiced as an advocate of a High Court for at least ten years, or be regarded by the President as a distinguished jurist.
These qualifications ensure that judges possess adequate legal knowledge, judicial experience, and professional competence.
The Chief Justice of India occupies the highest judicial office in the country. Traditionally, the senior-most judge of the Supreme Court is appointed as Chief Justice, though this convention has occasionally been departed from in the past, leading to controversy.
The Supreme Court also appoints ad hoc judges under Article 127 if there is lack of quorum or temporary necessity. Retired judges may also be requested to sit and act as judges under Article 128.
The Constitution incorporates several safeguards to ensure independence of Supreme Court judges.
One of the most important safeguards is security of tenure. Judges of the Supreme Court hold office until attaining the age of sixty-five years.
Their salaries, allowances, and privileges are charged upon the Consolidated Fund of India and cannot be reduced during tenure except during financial emergency.
Judges are prohibited from practicing law after retirement before any court or authority within India. This restriction prevents conflict of interest and preserves judicial dignity.
The removal of judges of the Supreme Court is governed by Article 124(4). A judge may be removed from office only on grounds of proved misbehaviour or incapacity.
The removal process is commonly known as impeachment, though the Constitution does not specifically use this term.
The procedure for removal is deliberately made difficult to protect judicial independence and prevent political interference.
A motion for removal may be introduced in either House of Parliament. The motion must be supported by at least one hundred members in the Lok Sabha or fifty members in the Rajya Sabha.
If admitted, an inquiry committee investigates the allegations. The committee generally consists of a Supreme Court judge, a Chief Justice of a High Court, and a distinguished jurist.
If the committee finds the judge guilty of misbehaviour or incapacity, the motion is taken up for consideration in Parliament.
The motion must then be passed by each House separately by a special majority, meaning a majority of the total membership of the House and a two-thirds majority of members present and voting.
After passage by both Houses, the President issues an order removing the judge.
This rigorous process reflects the constitutional commitment to judicial independence and institutional dignity.
Very few removal proceedings have reached advanced stages in India. One of the most prominent cases involved Justice V. Ramaswami, against whom impeachment proceedings failed in Parliament despite findings of financial irregularities.
Article 145 empowers the Supreme Court to make rules regulating its own procedure with approval of the President. This provision recognizes the autonomy of the judiciary in managing internal functioning and administration of justice.
Under Article 145, the Supreme Court has framed the Supreme Court Rules governing filing of cases, hearings, review petitions, curative petitions, appeals, writ petitions, and procedural requirements.
The Court determines its own procedure regarding constitution of benches, listing of matters, hearing of cases, and delivery of judgments.
The Chief Justice of India functions as the “Master of the Roster” and allocates judicial work among benches.
The Supreme Court generally functions through division benches consisting of two or three judges. However, constitutional matters involving substantial questions of interpretation of the Constitution are heard by Constitutional Benches consisting of at least five judges under Article 145(3).
Landmark constitutional cases often involve larger benches of seven, nine, eleven, or even thirteen judges depending on importance and complexity.
The procedure of the Supreme Court combines features of adversarial litigation, constitutional adjudication, and public interest jurisprudence.
Traditionally, only aggrieved persons could approach the Court. However, the development of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) significantly expanded access to justice.
The Supreme Court relaxed procedural technicalities and allowed social activists, journalists, lawyers, and public-spirited individuals to approach the Court for protection of rights of marginalized groups.
The Supreme Court also follows principles of natural justice, fairness, transparency, and reasoned decision-making.
Judgments delivered by the Supreme Court are binding on all courts within India under Article 141. This principle establishes the Supreme Court as the final interpreter of law.
Article 142 grants the Supreme Court extraordinary power to pass any decree or order necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter before it.
This provision gives the Court broad authority to ensure fairness and justice beyond technical limitations.
The Supreme Court possesses wide jurisdiction including original jurisdiction, appellate jurisdiction, advisory jurisdiction, writ jurisdiction, and review jurisdiction.
Under Article 32, individuals may directly approach the Supreme Court for enforcement of fundamental rights.
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar described Article 32 as the “heart and soul” of the Constitution because it guarantees constitutional remedies.
The Supreme Court also acts as the final court of appeal in civil, criminal, and constitutional matters.
Its advisory jurisdiction under Article 143 allows the President to seek the Court’s opinion on important legal or constitutional questions.
The independence of the Supreme Court forms a basic feature of the Constitution. Judicial review enables the Court to strike down laws and executive actions violating constitutional provisions.
Landmark cases such as Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala established the Basic Structure Doctrine, limiting Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution.
The Court has played a transformative role in protecting fundamental rights, expanding civil liberties, promoting social justice, and strengthening constitutional governance.
However, the judiciary has also faced criticism regarding judicial delays, backlog of cases, opacity in appointments, judicial overreach, and post-retirement appointments.
Despite challenges, the Supreme Court remains one of the most powerful and respected judicial institutions in the world.
In conclusion, the Supreme Court of India occupies a pivotal position under Articles 124 to 147 of the Constitution of India. It consists of the Chief Justice and other judges appointed by the President through the collegium system. The Constitution provides strict qualifications, safeguards for independence, and a rigorous removal procedure to preserve judicial autonomy and integrity. Article 145 empowers the Court to regulate its own procedure and functioning. Through its constitutional authority, judicial review, and protection of fundamental rights, the Supreme Court serves as the guardian of the Constitution, protector of democracy, and final interpreter of law in India.
Leave a Reply