Law of Precedemt
Law of Precedemt
“LAW OF PRECEDENT”
Introduction :
Precedent is a previous decision upon which the judges have
to follow the past decisions carefully in the cases before them
as a guide for all present or future decisions.
judgment of a Court of law cited as an authority for deciding
a similar set of facts, a case which serves as authority for the
legal principle embodied in its decision. A judicial precedent
is a decision of the Court used as a source for future decision
making.
Meaning :
decision of a Superior Court. Though law making is the work
of the legislature, Judges make law through the precedent.
2
Inferior courts must follow such laws. Decisions based on a
question of law are precedents. Decisions based on question
of facts are not precedents. Judges must follow the binding
decisions of Superior or the same court. Following previous
binding decisions brings uniformity in decision making, not
Article 141 of the Constitution empowers the Supreme Court
to declare the law and not to enact the law, which essentially
is the function of the legislature. To declare the law means to
interpret the law. This interpretation of law is binding on all
the Courts in India. This is called as precedent.
Definition of Precedent :
The term precedent is not defined anywhere. In
general English it means, A previous instance or case which
cases, or by which some similar act or circumstances may be
supported or justified”.
3
According to salmond :
law which may be cited and followed by courts.
In strict sense, that case law which not only has
great binding authority but must also be followed.
In all precedents are authority of past decisions
for future cases. It must be reported, cited and followed by
courts.
Object :
The main object of doctrine of precedent is that
the law of the land should be clear, certain & consistent so
Union of India Vs. Raghubir Singh (AIR 1989 SC 1933) it
has been held
“The doctrine of binding precedent has
consistency in judicial decisions, and enables an
providing assurance to the individual as to the
principle in the decisions of a Court.”
Origin of Precedent :
Precedent originates from the doctrine of stare
the decisions of the court and to law.
Stare decisis :
The maxim explains the doctrine of stare decisis.
statement of law found in decision of the superior court. Such
have to follow. The cases based on similar set of facts decided
by a court may arise in any future case. Following previous
decisions in similar future cases, the court may save time and
court settles a question of law or of fact, it is best to stand by
5
that decision while adjudicating similar cases in the future.
superior courts. They shall apply them on the facts or case
before them and decide accordingly.
In Indian legal system, the judges take guidance
and published in reports. These reports are considered to be
valuable from the legal literature perspective. Those decisions
decision is an authority for what it decides.
The ratio in the decision is its essence. The reason
binding in future cases.
ommissioner of Income Tax vs
In the case of C
M/s Sun Engineering Works Private Limited AIR 1993, SC
43, the Hon'ble Apex Court held that, “while applying the
6
Supreme Court and not to pick out words or sentences from the
consideration by the court to support their reasoning.”
It is very clear that, only those statements in an
decidendi of that case are binding. Statements which are not
essential or necessary for deciding the later cases, such non
authoritative statements are called as obiter dicta.
Ratio Decidendi :
Ratio decidendi means the reason or the principle
upon which the case has been decided by the higher Courts
and only this much is binding on the subordinate courts while
Kumar vs.Union of India and others , (
1990) 4 SCC 207
it
has been observed the hon'ble supreme court that:
“In other words, the enunciation of the reason
precedent. The ratio decidendi is the underlying
based on the test or abstract from the specific
peculiarities of the particular case which gives
rise to the decision. The ratio decidendi has to
be ascertained by an analysis of the facts of the
case and the process of reasoning involving the
major premise consisting of a preexisting rule
of law, either statutory or judgemade, and a
minor premise consisting of the material facts
of the case under immediate consideration. If it
is not clear, it is not the duty of the court to
spell it out with difficulty in order to be bound
by it.”
Obiter Dicta :
Obiter Dicta means all that is said by the court by
requirements of the particular case and which laid down rule
8
called obiter dicta. These dicta have the force of persuasive
precedents only. The judges are not bound to follow them.
hon'ble Supreme Court is entitled to highest respect and is
binding on all the Courts of the country. It is observed in case
of “Mohandas Issardas and others Vs. A.N. Sattanathan &
Others, A.I.R. 1995 (Bom.) 113” that:
authoritative pronouncement on the particular
aspect of law and treat that pronouncement as
binding. The Supreme court has now taken the
place of privy council and we would like to say
High Courts must accept as binding the 'obiter
dicta' of the Supreme Court in the same spirit
as the High Courts accepted the 'obiter dicta' of
the privy council.”
Sub Silentio :
may turn the decision of the court. Such decision is not an
silentio.
When Precedents cease to apply :
previous precedents as follows ;
I] Overruling
II] Reversing
III] Distinguishing
10
I] Overruling :
This is where a court higher in the hierarchy
previous decision is no longer binding.
II] Reversing :
This is where a higher court departs from
the decision of the lower court on appeal.
III] Distinguishing :
deemed sufficiently different so that the previous case is no
longer binding.
Order by consent of the parties :
parties. Those orders are not adjudication of the rights and
liabilities of the parties. That decision does not lay down any
principle. Those orders are not precedent.
11
Whether judgments of Hon'ble High Court are binding
as precedents :
Like Article 141 empowering the Supreme Court
to declare the law and making its precedents binding on all
the Courts, there is no specific provision directly empowering
the High Court to declare the law and making its decisions
binding on its subordinate Courts. But it is well settled that
the Courts from a State subordinate to a High Court from that
State are bound by its decisions. Question is what is the basis
for this settled law.
Commercial Co. Ltd. Calcutta and another V/s. Collector of
Customs, Calcutta (AIR 1962 S.C.1893) held in para 31 of
the Judgment as under :
“31…… Under Art. 215, every High
have all the powers of such a court including
Under Art. 226, it has a plenary power to
issue orders or writs for the enforcement of
which its exercises jurisdiction. It would be
and start proceedings in direct violation of
there is no specific provision, just like in the
power of supervision conferred on a superior
tribunal that all the tribunals subject to its
supervision should conform to the law laid
otherwise, there would be confusion in the
court in the State is binding on authorities
or tribunals under its superintendence, and
that they cannot ignore it either in initiating
involved in such a proceeding. If that be so,
the notices issued by the authority signifying
the launching of proceedings contrary to the
law laid down by the High Court would be
invalid and the proceedings themselves could
be without jurisdiction.”
Per incuriam decisions :
Per incuriam decisions do not have binding effect.
Per incuriam decisions mean where the court has acted in
ignorance of a previous decision of its own or of a court of
ignorance of the terms of a statute or a rule having statutory
force.
Kuer alias Kalika Singh & others (2003) 5 SCC 448 held
that :
when the court has acted in ignorance of a
previous decision of its own or of a court of
case before it, in which case it must decide
which case to follow; or when it has acted in
which case it must follow that decisions; or
statutory force.”
15
then law laid down by the larger bench will be binding. In
this regard the FiveJudges Constitution Bench of Honourable
Supreme Court in case of “Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra
Community v. State of Maharashtra, (2005) 2 SCC 673 ”
has observed that,
“The law laid down by this Court in a
decision delivered by a Bench of larger
strength is binding on any subsequent
Bench of lesser or coequal strength”.
This view is also followed by Honourable Bombay High
Court in case of “Reliance General Insurance Company Ltd.
quote Honourable Bombay High Court
mandates, for a High Court to adhere
in tune with the precedent of Supreme
Court and in particular of the larger
Benches. This is more so, if there are
divergent views by Honourble Judges of
the Supreme Court, on identical
issues.”
EFFECT OF ORDERS OF HIGHER COURT :
Any interim order passed even by the Supreme Court is
which is squarely involved in the later case. The Hon'ble Apex
3184]” has held that,
Conclusion :
courts. Precedents bring certainty in law. They always help
with applying the law correctly. Some times the judges may
support their views with help of the precedents. These are the
ensure the real justice, consistency, uniformity in the judicial
rights.
Submitted with all respect.
Group Members (U.M.Padwad)
Group Leader,
Shri. M. B. Pathan, District Judge I,
C.J.J.D & J.M.F.C., Sironcha. Gadchiroli.
Shri. V. M. Karhadkar,
C.J.J.D & J.M.F.C., Kurkheda.
Shri. S. M. Bomidwar
2nd Jt. C.J.J.D & J.M.F.C., Gad.
Shri. D. J. Patil,
C.J.J.D & J.M.F.C., Chamorshi