Courtesy : Anurag Mishra
Article 228 of the Constitution of India empowers the High Court to transfer certain cases from a lower court to itself. If a case involves a substantial question of law regarding the interpretation of the Constitution, the High Court may withdraw the case from the subordinate court. After determining the constitutional issue, the High Court may either dispose of the entire case or send it back to the lower court for the rest of the proceedings. This provision ensures that higher judiciary authorities handle significant constitutional questions.
What is the purpose of Article 228 of the Constitution of India?
Article 228 allows the High Court to withdraw cases from subordinate courts if it determines that a substantial question of law is involved regarding the interpretation of the Constitution. This transfer is necessary for the proper disposal of the case, ensuring that a higher authority with appropriate expertise addresses important legal issues.
What is the procedure for invoking Article 228?
The procedure for invoking Article 228 of the Constitution of India begins when a subordinate court identifies a substantial question of law concerning interpreting the Constitution in a case. Either party involved or the court may bring this issue to the High Court’s attention. The High Court, after examining whether the case involves such a constitutional question, may withdraw the case from the subordinate court. It then determines the constitutional issue and either disposes of the entire case or returns it to the subordinate court for the remaining proceedings.
What constitutes a “substantial question of law” under Article 228, and how is it distinguished from ordinary legal questions?
Under Article 228 of the Constitution of India, the Substantial Question of Law refers to a significant or complex legal issue that involves the interpretation of the Constitution. It is a question that has the potential to impact not only the parties in a case but also broader legal principles and constitutional rights. Such a question often requires the expertise of a higher court, like the High Court, to ensure the correct interpretation of constitutional provisions. The distinction between a substantial question of law and an ordinary legal question lies in their scope and importance. Ordinary legal questions deal with the application of established laws and precedents in routine matters. They are usually straightforward and can be resolved by lower courts. In contrast, a substantial question of law concerns issues where the interpretation of the Constitution is uncertain, where conflicting legal precedents exist, or where the legal question has widespread implications for the legal system or society at large.
Can the High Court step in to resolve important constitutional issues in your ongoing case?
Under Article 228 of the Constitution of India, the High Court can step in to resolve important constitutional issues in an ongoing case. If a lower court is handling a case that involves a substantial question of law regarding the interpretation of the Constitution, the High Court has the authority to withdraw the case and determine the constitutional issue itself. After resolving the constitutional question, the High Court may either dispose of the entire case or send it back to the lower court for further proceedings.
Can your case be transferred to the High Court under section 228 of the Indian constitution for a violation of a provision of other statutes?
This question came up before the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Yogesh Kumar vs. The Court Of Special Judge (Prevention Of Corruption Act) Bareilly and Another. The petitioner, Yogesh Kumar, was charged under Sections 7, 13(1)(d), and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. He sought to transfer the case to a higher court under Article 228 of the Constitution of India.
The Hon’ble Allahabad High Court observed the following:
“If there is any allegation of violation of any provision of IPC or Cr.P.C., the petitioner could have approached this Court under Article 226 of Constitution of India or to the Supreme Court under Article 32 of Constitution of India or under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.”
The court concluded that the petition primarily involved procedural matters rather than any substantial constitutional issue. Therefore, it did not warrant interference of the High Court under Article 228 of the Constitution of India.
Conclusion
Article 228 of the Indian Constitution serves as an important mechanism to uphold the uniformity and supremacy of constitutional interpretation across Indian courts. The necessary ingredients for invoking Article 228 are the involvement of a substantial question of law related to the interpretation of the Constitution, the pending matter being before a subordinate court, and the High Court’s belief that the question of law requires authoritative determination. This provision ensures that the highest courts resolve important constitutional questions, promoting consistency in judicial interpretation and safeguarding constitutional principles throughout the legal system.