Supreme Court judge Justice B V Nagarathna has cautioned against the growing tendency to revisit or overturn judgments simply because the composition of the bench has changed. Speaking at the International Convention on the Independence of the Judiciary at O.P. Jindal Global University in Sonipat on Saturday, she said that verdicts of the apex court must not be treated as if they are “written in sand”.
Justice Nagarathna stressed that judicial decisions require stability, continuity, and respect within the legal system. “An evolved understanding of judicial independence warrants the assurance by our system of laws that a judgment once rendered by a judge will hold its anchor in time for it is written in ink and not in sand,” she said.
She added that it is the responsibility of everyone involved in the legal and governance ecosystem to respect judicial outcomes. “It is a duty of the many participants of the legal fraternity and governance framework to respect a judgment for what it is, raise objections only in accordance with traditions embedded in law and not attempt to toss it out solely because the faces have changed,” she said.
Justice Nagarathna noted that the judiciary forms a central pillar of governance, especially in a system where liberal standing rules, wide powers, and powerful remedies bring a diverse set of disputes before the courts.
“With liberalised rules of standing, wide powers and a range of remedies, the court is frequently called upon to decide a whole spectrum of questions concerning the future of Indians. Today, the judiciary is seen as having a duty to ensure the rule of law, whenever infractions may occur,” she said.
She emphasised that judicial independence is not only upheld through judgments but also through the personal conduct of judges. A judge’s behaviour, she said, must be “beyond suspicion”, and political neutrality remains essential for an impartial justice system.
Her remarks come days after the Supreme Court itself flagged concerns about a “growing trend” of litigants seeking reconsideration of judgments through fresh or specially constituted benches.
On November 26, a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih warned that revisiting final orders threatens the principle of finality in litigation. The bench noted that respecting final verdicts helps prevent endless legal battles and preserves public confidence in the judiciary.
