Judicial – Bench Strength – Decorum II

Posted on by Rudrajyoti Nath Ray

Constitution Benches are constituted to resolve a constitutional issue, harmonize conflicting views and settle law. Constitution Bench decisions might only be reconsidered by a Constitution Bench of a Larger Strength and that too in exceptional and compelling circumstances. Bench of Lesser Strength cannot revisit a proposition laid down by at least Three Constitution Benches.

Raj Kumar Karwal v. Union of India, (1990) 2 SCC 409 has reaffirmed verdict of Three Constitution Benches and does not require reconsideration. Nor does Kanhaiyalal v. Union of India, (2008) 4 SCC 668 require reconsideration.

– Hon’ble Justice Indira Banerjee, Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu, [Criminal Appeal No. 152 of 2013].

It is clear Raj Kumar Karwal v. Union of India, (1990) 2 SCC 409 cannot possibly have laid down law correctly. Kanhaiyalal v. Union of India, (2008) 4 SCC 668 goes on to follow Raj Kumar Karwal v. Union of India, (1990) 2 SCC 409. Both do not state law correctly and are thus overruled.

– Hon’ble Justice R.F. Nariman and Hon’ble Justice Navin Sinha, Tofan Singh v. State of Tamil Nadu, [Criminal Appeal No. 152 of 2013].

Chess

Now that it has been declared in Tofan Singh, Kanhaiyalal and Raj Kumar Karwal did not state correct legal position and they stand overruled, entire case set up against Balwinder Singh collapses like a house of cards.

– Hon’ble Justice Hima Kohli, Balwinder Singh v. Narcotics Control Bureau, [Criminal Appeal No. 1136 of 2014] decided on 22.09.2023.

_____

Co-ordinate Bench cannot comment upon discretion exercised or decision rendered by another Co-ordinate Bench of Same Strength. Only proper course to adopt would be a Larger Bench. Jai Sri Sahu v. Rajdewan Dubey, AIR 1962 SC 83 made very pertinent observations.

“Law will be bereft of all its utility if it should be thrown into a state of uncertainty by reason of conflicting decisions. It is therefore desirable, in case of difference of opinion, question should be authoritatively settled.”

– Hon’ble Justice Bela M. Trivedi, Sanjay Kumar Agarwal v. State Tax Officer, [Review Petition (Civil) No. 1620 of 2023 in Civil Appeal No. 1661 of 2020] decided on 31.10.2023.

'The Last Word' seeks to include not only wise and witty sayings but also curiosities. These words are not of obligation but of delight. I am not alone in my refusal to believe, law is tedious. For all who escaped these percipient eyes, mea culpa maxima. History, after all, has many cunning passages, contrived corridors and issues.