{"id":122364,"date":"2026-09-02T11:09:02","date_gmt":"2026-09-02T05:39:02","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/?p=122364"},"modified":"2026-09-02T11:09:02","modified_gmt":"2026-09-02T05:39:02","slug":"article-1243-and-the-unused-route-to-the-supreme-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/article-1243-and-the-unused-route-to-the-supreme-court\/","title":{"rendered":"Article 124(3) and the Unused Route to the Supreme Court"},"content":{"rendered":"<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>a Latest News<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">More than 76 years after the Constitution came into force, the provision (<\/span><b>Article 124(3)<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">) allowing a \u201c<\/span><b>distinguished jurist<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201d to be appointed directly as a Supreme Court judge has never been used.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Speaking at the 13th convocation of National Law University Delhi on August 30, 2026, Justice Ujjal Bhuyan described this as an \u201c<\/span><b>unused mandate<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">\u201d that requires serious consideration.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">He argued that bringing distinguished jurists from legal academia and scholarship could diversify the Supreme Court Bench.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">It could strengthen the SC\u2019s ability to address public law and constitutional questions, and reduce excessive dependence on narrow technicalities.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Constitutional Provision &#8211; Article 124(3)<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><b>Three routes to the Supreme Court:<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Article 124(3) provides that a person can become a Supreme Court judge if they are an Indian citizen and &#8211;<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Have been a High Court judge for at least five years;<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Have been an advocate of a High Court for at least ten years; or<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Are, in the opinion of the President, a \u201cdistinguished jurist.\u201d<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The first two routes have traditionally been used. Most Supreme Court judges are elevated from the High Courts, while a smaller number are appointed directly from the Bar. The third route has never been exercised.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><b>High Court provision:<\/b><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>Article 217<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> deals with appointment of High Court judges.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">During the Emergency, the <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/42nd-constitutional-amendment-act\/\" target=\"_blank\">42nd Constitutional Amendment (1976)<\/a><\/strong> introduced a similar provision for appointing distinguished jurists to High Courts.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">However, this provision was subsequently removed by the 44th Constitutional Amendment (1978).<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Why Was the Jurist Route Introduced?<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The provision originated during the Constituent Assembly debates on May 24, 1949.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><b>H.V. Kamath &#8211; Broaden the talent pool:<\/b>\n<ul>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">H.V. Kamath argued that Supreme Court appointments should not be confined exclusively to judges and practising advocates.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Constitution should permit persons possessing \u201coutstanding legal and juristic learning\u201d, even if they had never practised in court.<\/span><\/li>\n<li><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">He cited the International Court of Justice (ICJ) as an example of a judicial institution drawing upon wider legal expertise.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><b>M. Ananthasayanam Ayyangar &#8211; Need for constitutional expertise:<\/b><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Ayyangar supported the proposal, observing that practising lawyers may not necessarily encounter the complex constitutional and public-law questions routinely dealt with by a constitutional court.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><b>B.R. Ambedkar:<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> He did not oppose the principle. His <\/span><b>concern <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">was primarily with the terminology\u2014particularly whether \u201cdistinguished\u201d was the appropriate word. The provision was ultimately adopted.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Who Is a \u201cDistinguished Jurist\u201d?<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The Constitution <\/span><b>does not define<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> the term.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Broadly, it can encompass persons with exceptional expertise in legal practice, teaching, research or jurisprudence, including eminent legal academics who may lack conventional courtroom experience.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">However, India presents an <\/span><b>institutional difficulty<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> &#8211; Bar Council rules generally restrict full-time law teachers from simultaneously practising law.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Consequently, outstanding academics may not possess the litigation experience traditionally associated with judicial appointments.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Why Has the Provision Remained Unused?<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li><b>Perceived lack of suitable candidates: <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Successive governments and, later, the judicial collegium may have believed that Indian legal academia has not produced candidates with sufficient depth and distinction for appointment to the SC<\/span><\/li>\n<li><b>Lack of serious exploration:<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> An alternative explanation is that neither the government nor the collegium has seriously explored the constitutional avenue.<\/span><\/li>\n<li aria-level=\"1\"><b>Problem reinforced by the present collegium system:\u00a0<\/b><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"list-style-type: none;\">\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Although Article 124(3) refers to the President&#8217;s opinion, contemporary Supreme Court appointments are initiated through the Supreme Court collegium.\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Therefore, a distinguished jurist would ordinarily need to be identified and recommended by the collegium before the government processes the appointment.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Why Revive the Provision?<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Justice Bhuyan&#8217;s argument goes beyond simply increasing the number of potential candidates.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">A distinguished jurist could &#8211;<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>Diversify <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">the composition of the Supreme Court Bench;<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Bring stronger <\/span><b>expertise <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">in constitutional and public law;<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Introduce perspectives from legal scholarship and academia;<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><b>Enrich <\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">judicial reasoning beyond narrowly technical questions;<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Strengthen the Court&#8217;s capacity to deal with increasingly complex constitutional, institutional and socio-legal issues.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Thus, Article 124(3) can potentially serve as a mechanism for bringing specialised legal knowledge into India&#8217;s highest constitutional court.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>The Institutional Challenge<\/b><\/h2>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The larger issue is not merely whether India has eminent jurists, but how they should be <\/span><b>identified<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\"> and <\/span><b>appointed<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The absence of a transparent, accepted definition of \u201cdistinguished jurist\u201d, combined with the predominance of the collegium system, creates uncertainty over &#8211;<\/span>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Who qualifies\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">Who identifies the candidate\u00a0<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">What criteria are applied<\/span><\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"2\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">How independence and merit are protected<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400;\" aria-level=\"1\"><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">The experience of legal scholar Upendra Baxi, who was reportedly considered for judicial elevation but was never appointed, illustrates how the jurist route has remained largely <\/span><b>theoretical<\/b><span style=\"font-weight: 400;\">.<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b>Source: <\/b><a href=\"https:\/\/indianexpress.com\/article\/explained\/explained-law\/article-124-3-distinguished-jurist-supreme-court-judge-10857738\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"nofollow noopener\"><b>IE<\/b><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>More than 76 years after the Constitution came into force, the provision (Article 124(3)) allowing a \u201cdistinguished jurist\u201d to be appointed directly as a Supreme Court judge has never been used.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":19,"featured_media":122380,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[18],"tags":[9952],"class_list":["post-122364","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-upsc-mains-current-affairs","tag-article-1243","no-featured-image-padding"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/122364","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/19"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=122364"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/122364\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":122387,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/122364\/revisions\/122387"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/122380"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=122364"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=122364"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/vajiramandravi.com\/current-affairs\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=122364"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}