STATE OF U.P. & ORS. versus AJAY KUMAR SHARMA & ANR

Citation: [2015] 12 S.C.R. 627 · Decided: 26-11-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: VIKRAMAJIT SEN · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2015] 12 S.C.R. 627 
STATE OF U.P. & ORS. 
v. 
AJAY KUMAR SHARMA&ANR. 
(Civil Appeal Nos.13727 of 2015) 
NOVEMBER 26, 2015 
[VIKRAMAJIT SEN AND ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s. 24 - (UP 
Government) Legal Remembrance's Manual - District c 
Government Counsel (Civil and Criminal) in the Subordinate 
Courts across the State - Renewal of Appointment or 
reconside~ their candidat~re - Held: State, like any other 
litigant, must have the freedom to appoint counsel in whom 
they repose trust and confidence- Choice made by the State D 
should not be such as could defeat the sacred and onerous 
responsibility of ensuring that the justice is meted out to all 
citizens - Correct approach is to ensure the competency of 
advocate_~ being considered for appointment of Additional 
District Government Counsel, Assistant District Government E 
Counsel, Panel lawyers and Sub District Government 
Counsel- To start this process by considering the re-' 
appointment or renewal of existing Government Counsels 
would be incorrect since that would dilute, nay, dissolve the 
discretion of the Government to appoint advocates whom they F 
find trustworthy. 
Constitution of India, 1950 - Art. 141 - Doctrine of 
Precedent - Held: Mandates that an exposition of law must 
be followed and applied even by co-ordinate or co-equal G 
Benches and certainly by all smaller Benches and 
subordinate courts -Apart from Art. 141, it is a policy of the 
courts to stand by precedent and not to disturb a settled point 
- Purpose of precedents is to bestow predictability on judicial 
decisions- If binding precedents even of co-ordinate strength H 
627 
628 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 12 S.C.R. 
A 
are not followed, the roots of continuity and certainty of law 
which should be nurtured, strengthened perpetuated and 
proliferated would instead be deracinated - Departure may 
only be made when a co-ordinate or co-equal Bench finds 
the previous decision to be of doubtful logic or efficacy and 
B consequentially, its judicial conscience is so perturbed and 
aroused that it finds it impossible to follow the existing ratio. 
c 
Per Vikramajit Sen, J. 
Allowing the appeals, the Court 
HELD: 1.1 The principles of 'Precedent' and of Stare 
Decisis which are a cardinal feature of the hierarchical 
character of all Common Law judicial systems. The 
doctrine of Precedent mandates that an exposition of 
0 
law must be followed and applied even by coordinate or 
co-equal Benches and certainly by all smaller Benches 
and subordinate courts. That is to say that a smaller and 
a later Bench has no freedom other ~han to apply the 
law laid down by the earlier and larger Bench; that is the 
E law which is said to hold the field. Apart from Article 141, 
it is a policy of the courts to stand by precedent and not 
to disturb a settled point. The purpose of precedents is 
to bestow predictability on judicial decisions and it is 
beyond cavil that certainty in law is an essential 
F ingredient of rule of law. A departure may only be made 
when a coordinate or co-equal Bench finds the previous 
decision to be of doubtful logic or efficacy and 
consequentially, its judicial conscience is so perturbed 
and aroused that it finds it impossible to follow the 
G existing ratio. The Be.nch must then comply with the 
discipline of requesting the Hon'ble Chief Justice to 
constitute a larger Bench. [Para 10] [640-D-H] 
1.2 If binding precedents even of co-ordinate 
H strength are not followed, the roots of continuity and 
STATE OF U.P. v. AJAY KUMAR SHARMA 
629 
certainty of law which should be nurtured, strengthened A 
perpetuated and proliferated will instead be deracinated. 
[Para 11] [641-A] 
1.3 Sitting in a Division Bench of two, this Court at 
present can do no better than apply the rules of 8 
precedent as have been left for this Court to follow. The 
law pertaining to the appointment of Additional District 
Government Counsel, Assistant District Government 
Counsel, Panel lawyers and Sub District Government 
Counsel was directly in issue before the Three-Judge c 
Bench in State of U.P. v. Johri Mal where the law has 
been comprehensively clarified. [Para 14] [647-B-C] 
1.4 It is in the interest of the dispensation of criminal 
justice that competent counsel possessing integrity 
should alone be appointed, since otherwise, there is a D 
strong possibility of miscarriage of justice. In choosing 
them, the State will not only have to b~ .. satisfi

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.