Hello friends, the decisions of the judiciary are often important pillars of our legal system. But what happens when two decisions are different from each other? What should the High Court do in such a situation? The Supreme Court has recently given an important guideline on this, which will give more clarity to the justice system. Let us understand this decision in simple language.

What did the Supreme Court say?

The Supreme Court bench, consisting of Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan, said that if two decisions of the Supreme Court do not match each other, the High Court should not choose one and ignore the other. Rather, while balancing between the two, the decision whose facts match that particular case more should be given priority.

This idea is based on a famous decision of the British Lord Halsbury, which was later reiterated in the Punjab Co-operative Bank vs Income Tax Commissioner (1940) case. According to this principle, every decision is based on its specific facts and it would be wrong to consider the general words of any decision as an extension of the entire law.

What was said in earlier decisions?

Interestingly, the Supreme Court had earlier stated in several cases that if the decisions of two benches of the same level conflict with each other, the High Court should give priority to the earlier decision. For example, in the case of ‘UT of Ladakh vs Jammu and Kashmir National Conference’, the Supreme Court had clarified that the High Court should follow the earlier decision, as stated in the decision of ‘National Insurance Company Limited vs Pranay Sethi (2017)’.

What will the High Court do now?

Now the question is, which decision should the High Court follow? According to the new guidelines, the High Court will have to respect both the decisions and look at the facts that are more relevant to that particular case. That is, there will be no compulsion to follow only the old decision, but the right decision can be chosen by adopting a practical approach.

This guideline of the Supreme Court is an attempt to maintain balance in the judicial system. It gives more freedom to the High Court to make the right decision on the factual basis of the cases. This will increase transparency and credibility in the judiciary, which will further strengthen people’s trust in the justice system.

Disclaimer: Friends, this article is written for informational purposes only. If you need legal advice, contact a qualified lawyer. Hopefully, this information will help you understand.

Also Read:

Evolution and Scope of Administrative Law

Understanding the Law of Torts Bare Act: A Complete Guide

Supreme Court Slams Overpriced Lawyers: Justice Must Be Accessible to All