[In]Complete Justice: Reflecting on the Supreme Court at 75 -- triumphs and trials

The Limits of Article 142 and Judicial Activism

Speaking at the release of the book recently, Justice Muralidhar explained the reason for choosing this title. He said, “The not so infrequent recourse that the Supreme Court does and only it can to its power under Article 142 of the Constitution to do complete justice, even where well intentioned, can still have unintended negative consequences or leave the task half done and unfinished. This explains to some extent the choice of the title of the book”.

Speaking about the essays in the volume, he said, “They speak of the potential of the court to do complete justice at times and the constraints of the law and procedure that do not enable it to do so at other times.”

The book, through 24 essays and six cartoons, explores the many dimensions of the Supreme Court’s functioning—from its role in defending democratic freedoms to the institutional challenges it confronts. As Justice Muralidhar notes in his introduction, it grapples with enduring questions: How has the Court balanced judicial activism with accountability? Has it been consistent in its rulings, or has frequent overturning of larger bench decisions weakened its authority as the final arbiter? To what extent has it lived up to its counter-majoritarian role in checking State and popular excesses? Administratively, how has the office of the Chief Justice evolved, and how has the institution adapted to technology? And crucially, what has been the Bar’s contribution in shaping its trajectory?

A reading of the essays makes it evident, as Justice Muralidhar notes, that “the overarching tenor of the book is critical and reflective scholarship,” and is certain to fuel debate on judicial reform. Unsurprisingly, his reflections on the Court’s “low points” leave little unaddressed. From the infamous ADM Jabalpur ruling and the First Judges case to the Court’s failure to prevent the congregation of kar sevaks in Ayodhya, he does not shy away from confronting uncomfortable truths. Most striking is his account of the allegations of sexual harassment against former CJI Ranjan Gogoi: “The Bench was presided over by the CJI against whom the complaint was made! He proceeded to proclaim his innocence and the malice of the complainant from the high Bench, with his two colleagues in silent agreement. Many would wonder if a lower point than this could have been reached by the Supreme Court of India.”

This, however, should not suggest that the book, though critical, is pessimistic in its outlook. It also highlights the Court’s “high points”—from the landmark rulings decriminalising same-sex relations and affirming the right to privacy, to the S.R. Bommai judgment that curbed the misuse of Article 356, and the M.C. Mehta cases that advanced environmental protection.

The Court’s Enduring Challenges

Moving to other contributions, the book, which is a valuable compendium of brilliant essays, is vast in scope, engaging with almost every critical aspect of the Supreme Court’s functioning, the challenges it confronts, and the road ahead. It ranges from incisive essays on judicial appointments by Justice A.P. Shah and Justice Madan Lokur, to reflections on judicial delay and the technical intricacies of constitutional benches. Particularly noteworthy is the interview with Professor Upendra Baxi. The interview is centred around public interest litigation (PIL), which Professor Baxi prefers to refer to as “social action litigation”. The interview is both perceptive and steeped in legal wisdom.

It is well known that Justices V.R. Krishna Iyer and P.N. Bhagwati were the pioneers of PIL in India, and Professor Baxi’s reflections on them are especially striking. Asked how far the evolution of PIL was shaped by the personal philosophies of these judges, Professor Baxi offers a candid assessment.  Justice Krishna Iyer, Professor Baxi observes, “revelled in being an injudicious judge, if I may say so… He did not care about bourgeois law,” distinguishing between judges who were mere “shopkeepers of justice” and those who were “missionaries” animated by social justice. Professor Baxi says that, by contrast, Justice Bhagwati, though sharing much of Justice Iyer’s philosophy, was far more pragmatic — “a master craftsperson” who believed in “hurrying slowly,” carefully calibrating how much activism the Bar and his fellow judges could bear.

Part II, devoted to criminal law, contains three significant essays. Rebecca Mammen John traces how Supreme Court rulings have diluted safeguards in the Criminal Procedure Code, enabling arbitrary police powers and fostering harsh laws at odds with constitutional guarantees. Nitya Ramakrishnan critiques India’s continued reliance on extraordinary criminal statutes, noting their low conviction rates, disproportionate punishments, and erosion of the rule of law. Vrinda Grover examines sentencing practices, exposing how inconsistency, emotion, and societal pressures often override the Court’s own guidelines, rendering outcomes arbitrary and unpredictable.

Part III of the volume turns to the Court’s record in enforcing the equality principle enshrined in the Constitution, examining it through the lenses of gender, caste, region, and religious freedom. The most unconventional contribution here is by journalist P. Sainath—the only non-lawyer in the collection—whose essay stands out for its unique perspective, much like the six brilliant cartoons that punctuate the book with biting commentary on the judiciary’s not-so-bright state of affairs.

The Road Ahead for the Indian Judiciary

Sainath’s decades-long job as a ‘rural reporter’ and stories emanating from his field reporting, stories of unending fight for “complete justice” from India’s hinterland, make for an especially insightful contribution. His essay underscores the unevenness in how justice from the nation’s highest court is experienced—varying between metropolitan centres and remote regions, and between a high-profile journalist in the national capital region (NCR) and a modest reporter from a provincial town.

While engaging with overarching constitutional questions, the book does not neglect the less “glamorous” subjects—such as legal education, labour law, and the digitalisation of the judiciary—which are addressed with rare and valuable insight.

As noted, the book’s scope is vast, with several essays rich enough to stand alone as independent volumes for the breadth of issues they engage. Collectively, the essays offer ample reason to reflect on how, through its highs and lows, its hits and misses, the Supreme Court has shaped the political, social, legal, and economic trajectory of the nation. In his introduction, the editor remarks that if the book succeeds in triggering debate, dissent, or even disapproval, it will affirm that India remains a democracy governed by the rule of law. One only hopes this faith stems from confidence in the resilience of Indian democracy and the strength of its Constitution, rather than from a place of despair.