Indian Concept Of 'Dharma' Predates Common Law; Rule Of Law & Judicial Independence Not Western Imports : CJI Surya Kant

Rejecting the view that the Rule of Law and judicial independence are Western, post-colonial concepts gifted to the Global South, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Monday said that in the Indian consciousness, the supremacy of Dharma over personal or dynastic power has been an enduring principle for thousands of years, predating the common law tradition. 

"It is frequently presumed by many academics and legal scholars that the Rule of Law and Judicial Independence are purely Western, post-colonial imports gifted to the Global South. In the Indian consciousness, institutional integrity and the absolute supremacy of Dharma, which comprises the cosmic, ethical, and legal order, over personal or dynastic power, are ancient principles with roots stretching back thousands of years before the arrival of the common law," Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said on Monday.

The CJI was delivering the keynote address on "Safeguarding the Rule of Law: Experiences from India and Sweden" at an event organised by International IDEA in Sweden.

To illustrate the point, the CJI referred to an episode from the Mahabharata involving King Prahlada, his son Virochana, and the scholar Sudhanva. According to the anecdote, King Prahlada was called upon to adjudicate a life-and-death dispute involving his own son. Despite the personal stakes, he ruled in favour of Sudhanva after concluding that truth and justice outweighed filial loyalty.

"The sages remarked that when a judge abandons the truth, it is not merely a litigant who suffers, but also the very moral order upon which the entirety of civil society rests," the CJI noted while recounting the story.

He said the episode demonstrated that long before modern constitutional theory articulated the doctrine of separation of powers or institutional independence, Indian thought had already recognised that justice could survive only if judges remained insulated from personal, political, or dynastic pressures.

Calling judicial review not merely a constitutional power but a constitutional duty, the CJI said that the Indian judiciary has ensured that the Rule of Law remains "not an abstract constitutional promise but a lived and undeniable reality for every citizen."

The CJI observed that India's Constitution entrusted distinct responsibilities to the Legislature, the Executive and the Judiciary, with an independent judiciary serving as the principal safeguard against constitutional transgressions by the other branches.

"Courts, by definition, cannot be mere spectators in the constitutional order. They must remain vigilant guardians of constitutional supremacy, ensuring that no exercise of public power escapes the sustained discipline of law," he said.

Referring to the Constitution's framework, he said judicial review acts as a corrective mechanism whenever constitutional organs deviate from their assigned roles. The preservation of the Rule of Law, he added, depends upon a careful balance between the three branches of government.

The CJI described the Basic Structure Doctrine, evolved in the Kesavananda Bharati judgment, as one of the Indian judiciary's greatest constitutional contributions. He said the doctrine recognised that the Constitution possesses a core identity that cannot be destroyed even by constitutional amendment, with separation of powers forming an immutable part of that identity.

He also cited the S.R. Bommai judgment, which elevated federalism and democracy to the status of basic structure principles and held that an elected government cannot be dismissed without first proving its majority on the floor of the House.

Emphasising the importance of judicial independence, the CJI said the Constitution incorporates several safeguards, including the separation of the judiciary from the executive, protection of judges from legislative criticism concerning judicial conduct, and financial independence through the Consolidated Fund. He also referred to the evolution of the Collegium system, under which judicial appointments are predominantly made by the judiciary itself.

The CJI highlighted the transformative role played by the Supreme Court through public interest litigation, beginning with S.P. Gupta, which liberalised the traditional doctrine of locus standi and enabled public-spirited individuals to seek relief on behalf of disadvantaged groups. He also referred to the Court's practice of treating letters and newspaper reports as writ petitions through its epistolary jurisdiction.

Surveying the Court's constitutional jurisprudence, the CJI referred to landmark decisions including Hussainara Khatoon on speedy trials, Maneka Gandhi on due process, Francis Coralie Mullin on dignity, Olga Tellis on the right to livelihood, Bandhua Mukti Morcha on bonded labour, and Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb on granting bail despite statutory restrictions where prolonged incarceration violates the fundamental right to a speedy trial.

He also cited the Court's contributions in environmental protection, including the doctrines of absolute liability, polluter pays, precautionary principle and public trust, as well as judgments strengthening electoral democracy through voter disclosure requirements and recognition of free and fair elections as part of the Constitution's basic structure.

On gender justice, the CJI referred to the Supreme Court's recent directions ensuring greater representation of women in Bar Councils, the Vishaka guidelines against workplace sexual harassment, and progressive decisions expanding women's reproductive autonomy.

Concluding his address, the CJI underscored that judicial activism must always be balanced by judicial restraint.

"The Supreme Court has consistently recognised that the Rule of Law is preserved only when the Judiciary honours its own institutional boundaries while holding other branches to theirs. The Court does not sit as a second appellate authority or a super-executive over the complex technical and socio-economic choices made by any of the other organs of the State," he said.