Article 134

Article 134 of the Constitution of India defines the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in criminal cases, laying down the conditions under which appeals can be made from judgments, final orders, or sentences passed by High Courts. This provision serves as a vital safeguard in the administration of criminal justice, ensuring that serious cases — especially those involving the death penalty or miscarriage of justice — receive the highest level of judicial scrutiny.

Constitutional Framework and Objective

The appellate jurisdiction conferred under Article 134 ensures that individuals convicted of serious offences, particularly those facing capital punishment, have a constitutional avenue to seek redress from the Supreme Court. It reflects the framers’ intent to preserve judicial fairness and procedural integrity in criminal proceedings.
By providing for limited but critical appellate rights, Article 134 strikes a balance between finality of judicial decisions and the protection of fundamental rights of the accused, consistent with Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution.

Structure and Provisions of Article 134

Article 134 consists of two principal clauses outlining the conditions and scope of criminal appeals to the Supreme Court:

1. Clause (1): Circumstances for Appeals to the Supreme CourtThis clause enumerates three specific situations in which an appeal lies to the Supreme Court as of right:
   • Sub-clause (a): When the High Court has reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and sentenced them to death.
   • Sub-clause (b): When the High Court has withdrawn a case from a subordinate court, convicted the accused, and sentenced them to death.
   • Sub-clause (c): When the High Court certifies under Article 134A that the case is a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court.

   The first two sub-clauses provide an automatic right of appeal, whereas the third requires judicial certification by the High Court.

2. Clause (2): Parliamentary Power to Extend JurisdictionParliament is empowered to extend the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court by legislation. It may determine the conditions, limitations, and extent to which such appeals are allowed. This clause enables flexibility in the criminal justice framework, permitting Parliament to widen appellate access where necessary.
   An example of such statutory extension is found in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which complements constitutional provisions by defining the appellate processes and rights of appeal in criminal trials.

Interpretation of Sub-clause (c): Certification by the High Court

Under Article 134(1)(c), the High Court must issue a certificate of fitness for appeal when it believes that the case involves a substantial question of law or is otherwise deserving of Supreme Court consideration.
Certification under this sub-clause is not granted routinely; it is reserved for cases that present:

• Serious legal or procedural irregularities;
• Issues of public importance; or
• Questions concerning the interpretation of fundamental rights or constitutional principles.

This certification mechanism, governed by Article 134A, acts as a judicial filter, ensuring that only significant criminal cases reach the Supreme Court.

Role of Article 145 in Procedure

Under Article 145(1), the Supreme Court has the power to make rules regulating its own practice and procedure, including appeals under Article 134. Accordingly, the Court’s internal rules and the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 govern procedural aspects such as filing of appeals, admission, and hearing.

Judicial Interpretation and Landmark Cases

Over the decades, the Supreme Court has elaborated upon the scope and meaning of Article 134 through significant rulings:

• Kehar Singh v. State (Delhi Administration) (1988): The Court analysed the scope of appeals in death penalty cases and reiterated that Article 134 provides an additional safeguard against judicial error in capital punishment.
• Babu Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1978): Clarified the right to appeal in cases where the High Court reverses an acquittal and imposes a death sentence. The Court emphasised that such automatic appeals ensure a thorough review of evidence and due process.
• Mohan Lal v. State of Punjab (2018): Interpreted the meaning of a “fit case” for certification under sub-clause (c), holding that the High Court must objectively determine whether the legal or factual issues warrant consideration by the Supreme Court.
• State of Uttar Pradesh v. Rajesh Gautam (2003): Reiterated that appeals under Article 134 are confined to the specific conditions outlined in the provision and cannot be expanded through judicial interpretation.

Relationship with Other Constitutional Articles

• Article 134A: Governs the procedure for High Courts to certify cases as fit for appeal under Articles 132, 133, or 134.
• Article 136: Grants the Supreme Court discretionary power to grant special leave to appeal from any judgment or order passed by any court or tribunal, even when no right of appeal exists under Article 134.
• Article 145: Authorises the Supreme Court to frame procedural rules for appeals.
• Article 21: Protects the right to life and personal liberty, which underpins the judicial philosophy behind the appellate safeguards provided by Article 134.

Together, these Articles form a comprehensive system of judicial review in criminal matters, ensuring that the Supreme Court can intervene when required to correct judicial errors and uphold justice.

Significance of Article 134

Article 134 serves several crucial purposes in India’s criminal justice system:

• It ensures judicial oversight in serious criminal cases, particularly those involving the death penalty.
• It provides a constitutional avenue of appeal for accused persons whose cases involve grave questions of law or procedure.
• It upholds the principles of fair trial and due process, integral to Article 21.
• It allows the Supreme Court to maintain uniformity in the interpretation of criminal law across India.
• It prevents arbitrary or inconsistent application of criminal justice by allowing final review by the highest court.

Limitations of the Provision

The appellate right under Article 134 is restricted to specific conditions and does not confer a general right of appeal in all criminal cases. Its key limitations include:

• Only cases satisfying one of the three sub-clauses of Article 134(1) can be appealed.
• Appeals under sub-clause (c) require certification by the High Court, which exercises discretion.
• The provision does not cover all criminal convictions; for most cases, the only remedy lies under Article 136, through special leave petitions.
• It applies only to final judgments or orders, excluding interlocutory or procedural rulings.

These limitations ensure that the Supreme Court’s criminal appellate jurisdiction remains focused on exceptional and grave matters, preventing routine criminal appeals from overwhelming the Court.

Parliamentary Authority and Statutory Extension

Under Clause (2), Parliament retains the power to extend the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in criminal cases. For instance, statutes like the Code of Criminal Procedure and special laws (e.g., the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988) provide mechanisms for appeal and review consistent with constitutional provisions.
Such legislative flexibility allows the criminal appellate system to evolve in response to changing societal needs and judicial workloads.

Constitutional and Judicial Significance

Article 134 represents one of the fundamental safeguards within the Indian legal framework for protecting the rights of accused persons and ensuring judicial accountability in criminal proceedings. It reinforces the concept that justice must not only be done but must also appear to be done through opportunities for appeal in cases of exceptional gravity.