Home  > Recent Judgements  > INDIAN CONCEPT OF ‘DHARMA’ PREDATES COMMON LAW: CJI SURYA KANT REAFFIRMS INDIA’S ENDURING COMMITMENT TO THE RULE OF LAW

Jun-30- 2026

INDIAN CONCEPT OF ‘DHARMA’ PREDATES COMMON LAW: CJI SURYA KANT REAFFIRMS INDIA’S ENDURING COMMITMENT TO THE RULE OF LAW

Introduction

In a significant address highlighting India’s rich constitutional and legal heritage, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant asserted that the concepts of the Rule of Law and judicial independence are not merely Western legal imports but have deep roots in India’s ancient philosophical traditions. Speaking at the International IDEA event in Sweden on the theme “Safeguarding the Rule of Law: Experiences from India and Sweden,” the Chief Justice emphasized that the supremacy of Dharmaunderstood as the cosmic, ethical, and legal orderhas guided Indian governance and justice for thousands of years, long before the emergence of the common law system.

The address serves as an important reminder that India’s constitutional framework is built upon both modern democratic values and an indigenous tradition that has long recognized the necessity of impartial justice, institutional integrity, and constitutional accountability.

Rule of Law: An Ancient Indian Principle

Rejecting the common assumption that judicial independence and the Rule of Law are concepts inherited solely from Western constitutionalism, the Chief Justice observed that Indian civilization has historically placed Dharma above personal, political, or dynastic authority.

According to the CJI, the Indian understanding of governance has always recognized that rulers themselves are subject to a higher moral and legal order. This foundational principle demonstrates that the idea of limiting state power through law existed in Indian thought centuries before the development of modern constitutional democracies.

By emphasizing this historical continuity, the Chief Justice underscored that India’s constitutional values are not borrowed doctrines but are deeply intertwined with the nation’s own civilizational ethos.

The Mahabharata's Lesson on Judicial Impartiality

To illustrate this principle, the Chief Justice referred to a well-known episode from the Mahabharata involving King Prahlada, his son Virochana, and the learned scholar Sudhanva.

Faced with adjudicating a life-and-death dispute involving his own son, King Prahlada chose to uphold truth and justice rather than familial loyalty. His decision reflected the understanding that justice cannot survive where personal interests override legal and moral obligations.

The CJI highlighted the wisdom expressed by ancient sages, who observed that when judges abandon truth, the damage extends beyond individual litigants and threatens the very moral foundation of society itself.

The episode demonstrates that Indian jurisprudential thought has long recognized the necessity of insulating judicial decision-making from personal influence and political pressure.

Judicial Review as a Constitutional Duty

The Chief Justice reaffirmed that judicial review is not merely a constitutional power but a constitutional obligation entrusted to the judiciary.

India’s Constitution establishes a careful balance between the Legislature, the Executive, and the Judiciary, assigning each institution distinct constitutional responsibilities. Within this framework, the judiciary acts as the guardian of constitutional supremacy, ensuring that every exercise of public authority remains subject to constitutional limitations.

According to the CJI, courts cannot function as passive observers. They must actively safeguard constitutional governance whenever public authorities exceed or misuse their constitutional powers.

The Basic Structure Doctrine: India's Landmark Constitutional Contribution

Highlighting one of the most influential developments in Indian constitutional jurisprudence, the Chief Justice described the Basic Structure Doctrine as one of the judiciary’s greatest contributions to constitutional law.

Developed in the landmark KESAVANANDA BHARATI judgment, the doctrine establishes that while Parliament possesses broad powers to amend the Constitution, it cannot alter or destroy its fundamental identity.

The doctrine preserves essential constitutional features such as:

  • Rule of Law
  • Judicial Independence
  • Separation of Powers
  • Democracy
  • Federalism
  • Constitutional Supremacy

This principle continues to serve as a constitutional safeguard against excessive concentration of governmental power.

Federalism and Democratic Accountability

The Chief Justice also referred to the landmark S.R. BOMMAI decision, which reinforced India’s federal structure and democratic principles.

The judgment established that an elected government cannot be arbitrarily dismissed without first proving its majority on the floor of the legislature. By elevating federalism and democracy to components of the Constitution’s Basic Structure, the Supreme Court strengthened constitutional governance and limited executive arbitrariness.

Constitutional Safeguards Ensuring Judicial Independence

The address highlighted several constitutional mechanisms designed to preserve judicial independence in India.

These safeguards include:

  • Separation of the judiciary from the executive.
  • Protection of judges from legislative criticism regarding judicial conduct.
  • Financial autonomy through expenditure charged upon the Consolidated Fund.
  • Judicial primacy in appointments through the evolution of the Collegium system.

Collectively, these institutional protections ensure that judges are able to decide cases impartially, free from political or administrative interference.

Public Interest Litigation: Expanding Access to Justice

The Chief Justice also reflected upon the transformative role of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in expanding access to justice.

Beginning with the landmark S.P. Gupta decision, the Supreme Court liberalized the traditional doctrine of locus standi, allowing public-spirited individuals and organizations to approach courts on behalf of disadvantaged communities unable to seek judicial relief themselves.

India’s judiciary further expanded access through its epistolary jurisdiction, under which letters and newspaper reports have, in appropriate cases, been treated as writ petitions to protect fundamental rights.

These innovations have significantly strengthened constitutional remedies for marginalized sections of society.

Landmark Constitutional Jurisprudence

The Chief Justice surveyed several landmark Supreme Court judgments that have substantially expanded the scope of fundamental rights under the Constitution.

These include decisions recognizing:

  • The right to a speedy trial.
  • Due process protections.
  • Human dignity as an integral part of Article 21.
  • The right to livelihood.
  • Protection of bonded labour.
  • Bail in cases of prolonged incarceration despite statutory restrictions.

Through these judgments, the Supreme Court has consistently interpreted constitutional rights in a manner that advances substantive justice and protects individual liberty.

Environmental Protection Through Judicial Innovation

The judiciary has also played a pivotal role in developing India’s environmental jurisprudence.

The Chief Justice referred to several principles evolved through judicial decisions, including:

  • Absolute Liability
  • Polluter Pays Principle
  • Precautionary Principle
  • Public Trust Doctrine

These doctrines have significantly influenced environmental governance and continue to guide sustainable development while balancing economic growth with ecological preservation.

Strengthening Democracy and Electoral Integrity

The address also acknowledged the Supreme Court’s contribution to strengthening democratic institutions.

The Court has promoted electoral transparency through decisions requiring disclosure of candidates’ backgrounds and has consistently recognized free and fair elections as an essential component of the Constitution’s Basic Structure.

Such interventions reinforce democratic accountability and preserve public confidence in constitutional governance.

Advancing Gender Justice

The Chief Justice highlighted several judicial initiatives aimed at promoting gender equality.

Among them were:

  • The landmark VISHAKA GUIDELINES addressing workplace sexual harassment.
  • Progressive rulings strengthening women’s reproductive autonomy.
  • Recent directions encouraging greater representation of women in Bar Councils.

These developments reflect the judiciary’s continuing role in ensuring substantive equality and expanding constitutional protections for women.

India's Constitutional Vision Reflects Both Tradition and Modern Democracy

The Chief Justice observed that India’s constitutional framework represents a harmonious blend of the nation’s ancient philosophical values and modern democratic principles. While the Constitution incorporates universally accepted concepts such as the separation of powers, fundamental rights, and judicial review, these ideals resonate strongly with India’s longstanding civilizational belief that governance must always remain accountable to a higher moral and legal order. By placing constitutional supremacy above individual authority, the Constitution continues the age-old Indian tradition of ensuring that power is exercised within the limits of law, fairness, and justice. This unique synthesis of indigenous values and contemporary constitutionalism has enabled India to build one of the world’s most resilient democratic legal systems.

Judicial Activism Must Be Balanced by Judicial Restraint

While emphasizing the judiciary’s constitutional responsibility, the Chief Justice cautioned against judicial overreach.

He observed that the judiciary must remain conscious of its institutional boundaries and refrain from functioning as a super-executive or a substitute policymaker. Courts must respect the constitutional roles assigned to the Legislature and Executive while intervening only where constitutional violations demand judicial correction.

According to the Chief Justice, the Rule of Law is best preserved when every constitutional institution faithfully performs its own responsibilities without encroaching upon those of another.

Judiciary as the Guardian of Constitutional Morality

Emphasizing the broader role of constitutional courts, the Chief Justice noted that the judiciary serves not only as an interpreter of laws but also as the guardian of constitutional morality. Courts are entrusted with preserving the Constitution’s foundational values, including equality, liberty, dignity, secularism, and justice, while ensuring that every branch of government functions within its constitutional boundaries. Judicial independence, therefore, is not an institutional privilege but a constitutional necessity that protects citizens against arbitrary exercise of power. By faithfully enforcing constitutional principles and safeguarding individual rights, the judiciary strengthens public confidence in democratic institutions and reinforces the Rule of Law as the cornerstone of India’s constitutional governance.

Conclusion

Chief Justice Surya Kant’s address presents a compelling reaffirmation that India’s constitutional philosophy is deeply rooted in its own civilizational traditions. By tracing the modern principles of judicial independence and the Rule of Law to the ancient concept of Dharma, the speech challenges the perception that these values are exclusively Western legal constructs.

At the same time, the address reinforces the judiciary’s continuing constitutional obligation to safeguard democratic governance, protect fundamental rights, preserve institutional balance, and uphold constitutional supremacy. As India continues to navigate increasingly complex legal and constitutional challenges, the enduring ideals of Dharma, constitutionalism, judicial independence, and the Rule of Law remain central to maintaining public confidence in the justice system and preserving the integrity of the world’s largest democracy.