Suo Moto

Introduction Suo motu cognizance is a legal term that refers to the power of a court or tribunal to take notice of a matter on its own initiative, without the need for a formal complaint or petition to be filed. This power is typically used in situations where the court believes that a matter is of public importance or where there is a need to address an injustice. However, the misuse of Suo motu cognizance has become a concern in recent years. This can happen when a court takes Suo motu cognizance of a matter without having a valid legal basis for doing so, or when it uses this power to further its own agenda rather than to serve the interests of justice. One example of misuse of Suo motu cognizance is when a court takes notice of a matter that is already being dealt with by another court or tribunal. This can lead to delays and confusion, as well as a waste of resources. Another example is when a court takes Suo motu cognizance of a matter that is politically sensitive, and uses this power to further its own interests, rather than to serve the interests of justice. This can lead to a loss of public trust in the judicial system and can undermine the rule of law. In order to prevent the misuse of Suo motu cognizance, it is important for courts to exercise this power in a judicious and transparent manner, and to ensure that they are…

The Indian Courts seem to have pioneered the use of suo moto powers, inspiring other South Asian Courts, including Pakistan and Bangladesh. Since January 2020, (to June 2021) the Court has taken up 13 cases ‘suo moto’. This means they take up cases by their own notice, without any petition being filed, or interest being brought before them. These cases have included some of the most important ones during the pandemic, dealing with prisoners, migrant workers, vulnerable children and vaccine policy. Such a ‘suo moto’ power is granted by S. 23 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 in regards to contempt of court. Many other common law jurisdictions give Courts this power. However, the use of the procedure in writ or judicial review jurisdiction has been novel to India, where it is used to scrutinise or test executive (in)action. Marc Galanter and Vasujith Ram note that it developed from the relaxation of procedure when considering public interest litigations. The Courts have justified this power under Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950. One of the earliest uses of the suo moto procedure was in the Gujarat High Court case by Judge MP Thakkar (Special Civil Application 2785/79) in 1979. The Court took notice of a news article of a wife not being paid pension from the PPF after the death of her husband. The Court ordered the State to grant her pension. At the Supreme Court, in the Sunil Batra case in 1980, a letter was…