The Indian judicial system of India has hierarchical structure that serve as the steps of Law and Order to ensure timely delivery of justice, protection of Constitutional Rights and uniform interpretation of Law and Articles across the country.At the state level ,stands the High Courts of the state as the top most apex court where as Supreme Court of India is known as the apex Court of the nation(INDIA).
The state High Courts and the Supreme Court of India is designated to serve as the institution of Law ,to safeguard the fundamental rights of the citizens and to streamline the legal bindings within the state and the Country.
But most importantly both the court differ in certain attributes such as Constitutional authority, powers and functions of the respective courts, jurisdiction of the Courts functioning with in the Country, and overall impact.
Position in the Judicial Hierarchy
The Supreme Court and High Courts differ primarily in how they are positioned in the judicial system. High Courts are the highest courts in their respective jurisdictions and function at the state or union territory level. Every state or set of states has a High Court that is in charge of lower courts.
On the other hand, the Indian Supreme Court is the highest court in the country. It is the nation's highest court of appeals and has jurisdiction over all of India. The Supreme Court is the ultimate interpreter of the law since no court is higher than it.
Constitutional Foundation
The Indian Constitution gives both the Supreme Court and the High Courts their authority, yet their constitutional powers are different.
The Constitution's Articles 214 to 231 establish high courts. Their independence from executive intervention is ensured by constitutional guarantees of their jurisdiction, authority, and organization.
Articles 124 to 147 established the Supreme Court, which is tasked with protecting the Constitution. It plays a role that no other court can match in ensuring that all legislation and government activities adhere to constitutional standards.
Difference in Jurisdiction
High Courts of India and the Supreme Court of India is segregated on the basis of Jurisdiction.
Original, appellate, and writ jurisdiction are all available to High Courts. They have the authority to hear criminal and civil appeals from lower courts and to issue writs under Article 226 to enforce basic rights. Within their borders, they have extensive writ jurisdiction that covers both basic rights and other legal rights.
Original, appellate, advisory, and special leave jurisdiction are all available to the Supreme Court. It is the only body capable of resolving conflicts between states or between the Union and states. It directly defends constitutional liberties at the national level by issuing writs expressly for the enforcement of basic rights under Article 32.
Power of Judicial Review
Both courts exercise the power of judicial review, but the extent of this power differs.
High Courts have the authority to review the constitutionality of state laws and central laws within their jurisdiction. However, their decisions are binding only within the territory of that particular High Court.
The Supreme Court’s judicial review power has nationwide effect. When it declares a law unconstitutional, the law becomes invalid throughout India. This nationwide binding effect reinforces the Supreme Court’s supremacy in constitutional matters.
Finality of Judgments
The decision of the Supreme Court of India is final and no High Courts of India can over rule it. Appeals or special leave applications may be used to contest High Court rulings before the Supreme Court. High Courts do not, therefore, represent the last phase of litigation.
The court of last resort is the Supreme Court. Only limited review or curative petitions may challenge its final, legally binding rulings. This finality guarantees consistency and clarity in the nation's legal interpretation.
Binding Nature of Decisions
Under Article 141 of the Constitution, the law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts in India. This means that High Courts and subordinate courts must follow the legal principles laid down by the Supreme Court.
Decisions of High Courts are binding only on subordinate courts within their jurisdiction. They do not bind other Indian High Courts, which may take a different view on the same legal issue.
Role in Protecting Fundamental Rights
While both the Supreme Court and High Courts are essential to the defense of fundamental rights, their methods and purview are different. At the state level, High Courts serve as easily accessible constitutional courts for citizens. They hear a lot of writ petitions pertaining to administrative actions, rights abuses, and service issues.
The Supreme Court is the ultimate protector of basic rights through Article 32. Because it enables citizens to directly petition the Supreme Court for the enforcement of fundamental rights, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar referred to Article 32 as the "heart and soul of the Constitution."
Advisory Jurisdiction
One unique aspect of the Supreme Court is its advisory jurisdiction.
Under Article 143, the President of India may seek opinion from the Supreme Court’s on important questions of law or public importance. Although advisory opinions are not binding, they carry immense constitutional significance.
High Courts do not possess any advisory jurisdiction, which further highlights the distinct constitutional role of the Supreme Court.
Composition and Appointment of Judges
In order to maintain judicial independence at the state level, the President of India appoints High Court judges after consulting with the Chief Justice of India and other senior judges. The Chief Justice of India and the most senior judges participate in the Collegium System, which appoints Supreme Court justices. Because of the types of issues they decide, Supreme Court judges have more experience, responsibility, and constitutional significance.
National vs Regional Impact
High Courts largely deal with regional and state-specific issues, including local laws, administrative decisions, and disputes arising within their territory.
The Supreme Court addresses issues of national importance, such as constitutional amendments, federal disputes, national policies, and landmark public interest litigations that affect the entire country.
Conclusion
The Supre Court of India and the State Courts are the pillars of the judicial System of the Country but they differ significantly in their position, jurisdiction, authority, and scope of influence. High Courts ensure justice at the state level and serve as the primary constitutional courts for citizens. The Supreme Court, on the other hand, stands as the ultimate authority on constitutional interpretation, fundamental rights, and national legal uniformity.
These differences are not a division but a complementary balance, ensuring that justice in India is both accessible and supreme. Together, High Courts and the Supreme Court strengthen democracy, uphold the rule of law, and preserve the constitutional spirit of the nation.
