Article 141: Law declared by Supreme Court to be binding on all courts

Leading cases

• Bengal Immunity Co. Ltd. v. State of Bihar (1955)Until Parliament provides otherwise, no State may tax sales in the course of inter-State trade under Article 286(2), even if goods are delivered for consumption in that State; the Court departed from its United Motors decision.
• Union of India v. Raghubir Singh (1989)A Division Bench's ruling binds later Benches of equal or smaller strength; enhanced 30 per cent solatium under Section 30(2) of the 1984 amendment applies only to awards made between 30 April 1982 and 24 September 1984, and appeals therefrom.
• Balwant Rai Saluja v. Air India Ltd. (2014)Workers engaged by a contractor to run a statutory canteen are workers of the factory only for the Factories Act, 1948; to be its employees for all purposes, the employer must exercise effective and absolute control over them.
• Kunhayammed v. State of Kerala (2000)The Court held that dismissal of a special leave petition, whether by a speaking or non-speaking order, does not attract the doctrine of merger, so the High Court's order remained open to review by the High Court.
• Vineet Narain v. Union of India (1997)The Court struck down Directive No. 4.7(3) of the Single Directive, which required prior sanction before the CBI inquired into senior officers, and issued binding directions under Articles 32 and 142 to insulate investigating agencies.
• Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997)In the absence of legislation, the Court laid down binding guidelines and norms to prevent sexual harassment of women at all work places, reading international conventions such as CEDAW into Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g) and 21.
• Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra (2010)Following the Constitution Bench in Sibbia, anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC need not be confined to exceptional cases or limited in time, and ordinarily continues till the end of the trial unless cancelled.

Questions on this article

18 questions in 23 of our papers cite Article 141. Try these from the free papers:

1. 1. Consider the following statements: 1. Under Article 141, a decision of a High Court is binding on all courts throughout the territory of India. 2. Under Article 141, the law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts within the territory of India. 3. In Bengal Immunity Co. v. State of Bihar (1955), the Supreme Court held that it is not bound by its own earlier decisions. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

   A.1 and 2 onlyB.1, 2 and 3C.2 onlyD.2 and 3 only
   Show answer

2. 2. Consider the following statements: 1. The law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts within the territory of India. 2. Under Article 141, the Supreme Court is bound by its own earlier decisions and cannot depart from them. 3. All authorities, civil and judicial, in the territory of India are required to act in aid of the Supreme Court. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

   A.1 and 3 onlyB.1, 2 and 3C.1 onlyD.1 and 2 only
   Show answer

3. 3. "Obiter dicta" in a judgment refers to:

   A.Observations made by the judge that are not essential to the decisionB.The binding part of the judgmentC.The final order of the courtD.The facts of the case
   Show answer