SC frowns on 'growing trend' of own benches reversing Court orders, Pg1

Key Highlights:

• A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court has raised concerns about the increasing trend of subsequent benches overturning prior verdicts.
• The court observed that this practice undermines the authority of the Supreme Court and the value of its pronouncements.
• The observation was made while dismissing a plea from a murder accused seeking relaxation of his bail conditions.
• The court referenced instances like the stray dogs matter and the environmental clearance case where prior verdicts were revisited.

Detailed Insights:

• The court emphasized that verdicts on legal issues should be final and followed by all courts, as per Article 141 of the Constitution.
• Re-opening verdicts based on differing views defeats the purpose of Article 141, which aims to establish the Supreme Court as the final arbiter of law.
• The court highlighted that overturning prior verdicts does not necessarily equate to better justice, cautioning against seeking favorable outcomes through changed bench compositions.
• Recent instances, such as the stray dogs matter and the environmental clearance case, exemplify the concerning trend of revisiting established judgments.
• The environmental clearance case involved a three-judge bench recalling a two-judge bench order that struck down a central government notification.

Key Concepts Involved:

• Article 141: States that the law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the territory of India.
• Verdict: A formal decision or finding made by a court on the issues in a case.
• Bail conditions: Restrictions imposed on a person released on bail to ensure their appearance in court and prevent obstruction of justice.