MUMBAI: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Saturday likened the Indian Constitution to a “mighty river” and said that, for high courts to be future-ready, they needed to evolve and adapt to overcome the frontiers of the digital gateway, protect citizens’ rights from infringement by “automated systems” or burgeoning tech, and harness technology to ensure judicial equality through virtual hearings.The future of the High Court depends on its ability to act as a proactive guardian. The Court must not only wait for the knock at the gate but must remain alert to systemic failures in the rule of law, he noted.Online VC hearings should be embraced by HCs as a “permanent pillar of accessibility”, said the CJI, also calling for “procedural innovation” to address the “right-remedy gap” and to be a catalyst for actual administrative change through monitoring and supervision.
The CJI also underscored “need to strengthen dispute resolution beyond the court room” saying “future of justice depends not on how efficiently we adjudicate disputes but, how wisely.
” Arbitration, mediation and conciliation are mature methods that preserve relationships, the CJI stressed.“A tribal woman in Gadchiroli or a worker in a remote corner of the Northeast should not have to travel hundreds of miles to seek a writ of mandamus. The future of Article 226 lies in a ‘Court without Walls’, where legal protection is a seamless, accessible reality,” said the 53rd CJI, who assumed office last November. He delivered the Fali Nariman Memorial lecture in Mumbai on the topic, “Sentinel on Qui Vive (on the alert): Article 226 as the Guardian of Access to Justice”.The CJI cautioned against routine matters that had alternate remedies cluttering the system.
“Access to justice is hollow if it comes after a decade of litigation. Ameliorating the role of the High Court requires a disciplined Bar and a focused Bench,” he added. Justice is sustained not by the bench or bar alone, but by a collective discipline in discharging duties, the CJI observed.Later, at his felicitation, the CJI praised the Bombay HC for its stellar legacy of clarity and courage and said Bombay HC judges have shown how ‘independence is preserved through self-discipline and public confidence is earned through consistency.”The CJI assured both the deputy chief ministers, Eknath Shinde and Ajit Pawar, that he would examine their request to make the HC Kolhapur circuit bench a “permanent bench.” The CJI said, “I can assure you from my side, I will examine the issue and will take up with the quarters concerned and from the Supreme Court, there shall be a consistent support to their cause.”The SC Judge Dipankar Datta raised a plea for HC judges to make fuel allotment from 200 litres per month to 2,400 litre per year to ensure the unused quota is not wasted.
The CJI said he would try to resolve “the seemingly anomalous situation” soon.Bombay HC CJ Shree Chandrashekhar spoke of the CJI’s middle-class upbringing that valued “hard work, honesty, discipline and friendship”, and taught resilience and purpose. Unlike many, the CJI continued his learning after he became a HC Judge by doing his masters in law from Kurukshetra University.Shinde said Haryana, the CJI’s hometown, and Maharashtra were both lands of the valiant warriors.
He spoke of various landmark decisions of CJI Kant, including the one in the “India’s Got Latent” case, where Shinde said Justice Kant had underscored that the fundamental right to free speech is not served on a platter but must be exercised with caution, and the “right to dignity is greater than the right to free speech”.
Shinde also said the need to strike a balance between development and environment is key and said the new Bombay high court building would be “iconic.”
The conviction rate in the state is now 35% and we will raise it to 60% soon.Earlier, at the Nariman memorial, the CJI praised the late jurist for his integrity when he resigned as Additional Solicitor General during the Emergency. He also said Nariman understood early on that the Indian Constitution is a living charter to be “courageously invoked against the currents of power”.The CJI said the HC, through Article 226—its “extraordinary jurisdiction”—is the true “First Constitutional Court” for the citizen, whose reach is confined not only to fundamental rights violations but also to “any legal injury, the enforcement of statutory duties, and the containment of administrative caprice”.“This ‘extraordinary jurisdiction’ is precisely what makes the High Court the Sentinel on Qui Vive,” said the CJI, adding, “When the law is silent, the Sentinel does not remain mute.”The HC is the “Court that hears the first cry of the disenfranchised. Whether it is an illegal detention, the right to lead a dignified life, or a mandate to the administration, Article 226 ensures that the majesty of law is never more than a few miles away from the common man.
It is this decentralised strength that maintains the federal balance of our Republic, proving that while the Supreme Court may have the final word, the High Court often has the most vital one,” CJI Kant said. CJI Kant said, “Perhaps the most critical, yet overlooked, facet of access provided by Article 226 is the power of Interim Relief. For a small farmer whose land is being seized or a student wrongly denied admission, justice delayed is not just justice denied; it is justice destroyed.
The High Court’s ability to stay an executive action at the very first hearing is often the only real ‘access’ the citizen ever experiences.
It is the hallmark of the Court’s protective jurisdiction to intervene at the threshold, ensuring that the status quo is preserved so that justice is not defeated by the fait accompli of administrative haste.”The CJI added “In this sense, the high court fulfils the preambular promise of ‘social, economic, and political justice’. It ensures that the law is not a static monolith, but a dynamic force that bends towards the needs of the people it serves. As we look at the evolution of this provision, we see that it has transformed the high court from a mere forum for dispute resolution into a Guardian of the Constitutional Conscience.
“
