Suo moto powers of supreme court

• In legal terms, “suo moto cognizance” refers to the authority of a court to initiate legal proceedings on its own, without the need for a formal complaint or petition from any party. This process is triggered by information the court obtains from media reports, letters, or other reliable sources.
• Under Articles 32 and 226 of the Indian Constitution, both the Supreme Court and High Courts in India have the power to take suo moto cognizance of cases. Article 32 empowers the Supreme Court to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights, while Article 226 grants similar powers to High Courts within their respective jurisdictions.
• Suo moto cognizance is often associated with Public Interest Litigation (PIL), a procedure that allows individuals or social activists to approach the court in matters of public interest. This concept has broadened the judiciary’s role in addressing issues of social justice and public concern.
• Suo moto cognizance is considered an example of judicial activism, where judges take proactive steps to address urgent issues that might otherwise be overlooked. By initiating such cases, courts aim to ensure the swift and effective administration of justice. While courts usually require a petition from an aggrieved party, they sometimes take suo moto cognizance to correct improper orders or address injustices.

Instances where suo moto can be applied-

• Contempt of Court: Courts may take suo moto cognizance in cases of contempt, which include intentional disobedience of court orders or actions that undermine the authority and dignity of the court.
• Reopening of Old Cases: If new and substantial evidence comes to light, the court may exercise suo moto cognizance to reopen a previously closed case.
• Order Probes for New Cases: Courts may initiate investigations or order inquiries based on information from affected individuals or media reports, particularly in instances where there appears to be an injustice against an individual or a group.
• Protection of Fundamental Rights: Suo moto cognizance can be employed when a citizen’s fundamental rights are at risk or have been violated.
• Matters of Public Interest: The court may intervene in situations that impact a large segment of society or involve significant public interest.

Negative aspects of Suo Moto

Jurisdictional Overlap: Courts have the power to take suo moto cognizance of cases already under consideration by other courts or institutions. This can lead to confusion, as different courts may adopt varying strategies and timelines to address the same issue. Overlapping jurisdiction may result in conflicting rulings and delays in resolving the matter.

Political Sensitivity: Courts may exercise suo moto cognizance in politically sensitive cases, which can raise concerns about judicial overreach. Such actions might be perceived as an attempt to influence the political landscape, potentially undermining public trust in the judiciary’s independence and impartiality.

Misuse of Judicial Resources: The inappropriate use of suo moto cognizance can lead to the inefficient allocation of judicial resources. Courts may end up dealing with issues that could be more effectively managed through administrative or existing legal channels. This misallocation can hinder the judiciary’s ability to address other urgent and important matters.

Impact on Specialized Bodies: When courts take up matters already being handled by specialized administrative bodies or tribunals, it can disrupt their operations. These administrative entities often possess the expertise and experience needed to manage specific issues efficiently. Court intervention may disrupt their well-organized procedures, leading to delays and confusion.

The End of the Blog: Suo moto powers of supreme court