The Indian and American Supreme Courts Quiz

Answer: 1789 & 1950

Article III, §1, of the American Constitution provides that "[t]he judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish." The Supreme Court of the United States was created in accordance with this provision and by authority of the Judiciary Act of September 24, 1789 . It was organized on February 2, 1790.
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/about/about.html
On the 28th of January, 1950, two days after India became a Sovereign Democratic Republic, the Supreme Court came into being. The inauguration took place in the Chamber of Princes in the Parliament building which also housed India's Parliament, consisting of the Council of States and the House of the People. It was here, in this Chamber of Princes, that the Federal Court of India had sat for 12 years between 1937 and 1950. This was to be the home of the Supreme Court for years that were to follow until the Supreme Court acquired its own present premises.
http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/new_s/constitution.htm
The Federal Court in India's case had been set up after the passage of the Government of India Act, 1931 which devolved some powers to local legislatures by the British Government, and a Federal Court at Delhi to adjudicate with regard to matters relating to the Government of India Act, 1931.

Answer: False

While Judges in the American Supreme Court are appointed for life, the Judges of the Indian Supreme Court are appointed till the retirement age of 65.

Answer: 25, 9

While the strength of the American Supreme Court has been raised to 9 from 5 over 216 years of its existence by Congress in the USA, the Indian judiciary has expanded considerably faster. Originally, it too started with 11 judges, but the Legislature has found it necessary to increase Bench strength to 25 to deal with the massively expanding workload.

Answer: True

In both the systems, judges are appointed by the President as a way of the Executive exercising control over the judiciary. The procedure differs slightly though. Whereas in the American Supreme Court, the appointments have to be ratified by Congress, in the Indian Supreme Court, the appointments are made "in consultation" with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

This is also true for the appointment of Judges to other appellate Courts in both countries.

Answer: Marbury v. Madison

Marshall J, in the landmark case of Marbury v. Madison enunciated the doctrine of judicial review which states that the Court is the only body with the power to decide whether any law made by the Legislature is violative of the provisions of the Constitution. This is to prevent any abuse of power and check the power of both the Executive and the Legislature.
Surprisingly, such a vital doctrine is not actually found in the US Constitution, though most democratic Constitutions, including that of India, have incorporated this doctrine.

Answer: Epistolary Jurisdiction

Bhagwati J, in his decision in this case, laid down that the Supreme Court, under the powers granted to it by Article 142 which allows it to do anything to ensure full justice is done, allowed ordinary citizens to approach the Supreme Court even by writing a letter complaining of a wrong done to them by the State, by the introduction of the appropriately titled epistolary jurisdiction.

This combined with the activism of Supreme Court judges including Bhagwati J himself, spurred a flood of Public Interest Litigation which saw the Courts hauling up the government for its inaction and malpractices on a variety of issues affecting the common public.

Answer: 0,0

No Supreme Court judge has ever been impeached in either India or the USA. While it is easier to impeach justices of the Supreme Court of USA, no such impeachment motion has ever been PASSED against a judge. The process is slightly more complicated in India and similarly no judge of the Supreme Court has ever been impeached.

Answer: India

After the landmark decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala in 1973, which seemed to go against the Government's policies at that time, although a careful reading of the judgement proved otherwise. Under the guise of having a judiciary "committed" to the cause of "reform", or at least what Indira Gandhi wanted to do with the country, Justice AN Ray was appointed the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of India, despite being junior to Justices Grover, Shelat and Hegde.

This controversy, a violation of Constitutional Convention spawned an ugly controversy which saw the resignation of the three Justices in protest and charges that the Judiciary was becoming a hand-maiden of the Executive.

Answer: Justice William Douglas

Justice William Douglas, often regarded as an outspoken defender of individual liberties and privacy of citizens against State interference, was also the longest serving Justice of the Supreme Court, for nearly 36 years. In this period he faced impeachment proceedings thrice, but the motion was never passed in any of the situations. For an interesting discussion on the various impeachment motions, I recommend the article "Conservative politics, judicial impeachment, and Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas" by Gene C. Gerard, which can be found at http://www.onlinejournal.com/Commentary/051305Gerard/051305gerard.html

Answer: Justice Jackson

The Supreme Court of both India and the USA are institutions which stand as the keepers of the Constitution and liberties of the people, and will hopefully continue to exercise this enormous responsibililty of theirs in an accountable and transparent way.

Hope you enjoyed the quiz.