Judgments Should Not Be Tossed Out Solely Because Faces Have Changed : Justice BV Nagarathna
Judges' private conduct also determines the perception of judicial independence, Justice Nagarathna said, emphasising the importance of political insularity.
Making a veiled reference to the recent flurry of Supreme Court judgments being overruled by subsequent benches, Justice BV Nagarathna cautioned that decisions of the Court should not be revisited merely because the judges who authored them have changed.An evolved understanding of judicial independence, Justice BV Nagarathna said, requires assurance that once a judgment is rendered, it...
Making a veiled reference to the recent flurry of Supreme Court judgments being overruled by subsequent benches, Justice BV Nagarathna cautioned that decisions of the Court should not be revisited merely because the judges who authored them have changed.
An evolved understanding of judicial independence, Justice BV Nagarathna said, requires assurance that once a judgment is rendered, it “will hold its anchor in time, for it is written in ink and not in sand.” The Supreme Court Judge stressed that all participants in the legal fraternity and governance framework have a duty to respect judgments for what they are, challenge them only through processes rooted in law, and never seek to discard them merely because “the faces have changed.”
She was speaking at the International Convention on the Independence of the Judiciary at O.P. Jindal Global University,
An evolved understanding of judicial independence warrants the assurance by our system of laws that a judgment once rendered by a judge will hold its anchor in time for it is written in ink and not in sand. It is a duty of the many participants of the legal fraternity and governance framework to respect a judgement for what it is, raise objections only in accordance with traditions embedded in law and not attempt to toss it out solely because the faces have changed.
It may be noted that recently, a bench of the Supreme Court also expressed concern at the growing trend of judgments being overturned after the retirement of the judges who authored them.
“In the recent past, we have rather painfully observed a growing trend in this Court (of which we too are an indispensable part) of verdicts pronounced by Judges, whether still in office or not and irrespective of the time lapse since pronounced, being overturned by succeeding benches or specially constituted benches at the behest of some party aggrieved by the verdicts prior in point of time.”, observed a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih in a judgment rendered last week.
Recently, judgments such as Vanashakti, Delhi firecracker ban, TN Governor judgment, Bhushan Steel Insolvency etc, were overruled within months.
Independence Of Judiciary Preserved Not Just By Judgments But Judge's Private Conduct Too; Political Insularity Crucial: Justice Nagarathna
In her lecture, Justice Nagarathna emphasised that the independence of the judiciary is protected not only through the judgments judges write but also through the personal conduct they maintain. She said a judge's behaviour must be perceived as beyond suspicion, and that political insularity is essential for an impartial judicial system.
The conduct of a judge has to be more than merely lawful. Independence of judicial thought and conduct must not only exist but must also be perceived by the public to be beyond suspicion. That is our duty and the tall order we must live up to. Independence is preserved not by what we say in our judgments or in our defences but by what we refuse to do in our private conduct. Political insularity is critical to the independence of the judiciary. In formulating a general definition of judicial independence, most scholars have placed a great deal of emphasis on impartiality and insularity.
The event was attended by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal, senior Supreme Court judges, the Attorney General, Solicitor General and leading members of the Bar. Addressing them, she said judicial independence and the supremacy of law must work together to ensure the rule of law is never eroded by shifting political pressures.
Justice Nagarathna explained that the rule of law rests on two forms of public faith: faith in the Constitution, which binds even democratic legislatures, and faith in courts as impartial guardians of rights and liberties through judicial review. This dual confidence, she said, forms the bedrock of constitutional governance.
Reflecting on the Kesavananda Bharati judgment, she said it demonstrated the Supreme Court's commitment to both individual and institutional independence. The plurality of opinions in the case, she noted, showcased the Constitution's ability to reflect divergent reasoning while remaining united on foundational principles such as supremacy of the Constitution, separation of powers, fundamental rights and judicial review, which together form the Basic Structure.
Justice Nagarathna observed that judicial independence today carries three indispensable dimensions: it is reflected in a judge's conduct, it requires political insularity, and it must inspire confidence in posterity so that judgments retain their authority across time. Independence, she said, is ultimately intellectual and moral, demanding freedom to reason, humility to listen and courage to address difficult constitutional questions.
She emphasised that independence is preserved not merely by what judges say in their judgments but also by what they refuse to do in their private conduct. The Founding Parents of the Constitution, she remarked, viewed judicial independence as a right belonging to citizens rather than a privilege of judges.
Quoting the Supreme Court's observations in SP Gupta, Justice Nagarathna reminded that a judge must be “independent of himself,” overcoming passions, prejudices, likes and dislikes through discipline, training and humility. No constitutional safeguard, she said, can replace this inner strength.
Concluding her address, she reaffirmed that judicial independence lies at the core of India's Basic Structure. As the constitutional dialogue continues through courts and academic forums, she said it must remain loud enough to matter and respectful enough to endure into the future.