Paridhi Dave, Institute of Law, Nirma University
ABSTRACT
During the British era there were primarily two Courts in action, namely the British Crown Courts and the Company Courts. Since the jurisdiction of these Courts were not demarcated clearly, it caused certain problems. Resultantly, the Second Law Commission suggested establishment of High Courts and thus, the Indian High Courts Act, 1861 was passed. The High Courts established under the Act were bestowed with ordinary and extra- ordinary jurisdictions. In the pre-constitutional era, all the High Courts possessed the power to issue the prerogative writ of habeas corpus in the territories which fell under their ‘original and appellate jurisdiction.’
Jurisdiction has been defined in the Black’s Law Dictionary as “a term of large and comprehensive import and embraces every kind of judicial action” or that “it is the authority, capacity, power or right to act.”1 Jurisdiction can be categorised under three heads, namely – territorial, pecuniary, and subject matter.
In this paper, a modest attempt has been made to explore and understand the ‘territorial’ jurisdiction of the High Courts in India under Article 226 before the 15th Amendment Act, 1963 on the basis of the landmark judgments of the Honourable Supreme Court of India, and High Courts. The legislative history of Article 226 will be analysed with focus on the Constituent Assembly Debates which occurred in 1949 as well as the Lok Sabha Debates of the Indian Parliament.
