2014 Supreme(SC) 132

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
J.S. Khehar and M.Y. Eqbal, JJ.
RAKESH KUMAR – Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS – Respondents
Special Leave Petitions (C) No. 32555 of 2009
Decided On : 24-02-2014

When conflicting views exist between established judicial precedents, the matter should be referred to a larger bench (three judges) for authoritative adjudication to resolve the legal controversy.

Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure - Conflict of judicial views - Reference to larger Bench - Apparent difference of views expressed in preceding judgments - Matter requiring adjudication by a Bench of three Judges to resolve the controversy.

Facts of the case:
Arguments were heard in the special leave petitions but remained inconclusive. During the proceedings, a conflict was identified between the views expressed in certain prior judgments of the court.

Findings of Court:
The court observed an apparent difference of views between established precedents, determining that the remaining special leave petitions should be adjudicated by a larger bench to resolve the inconsistency.

Issues: Whether the conflict of views between prior judicial precedents necessitates the constitution of a larger bench for the adjudication of the present controversy.

Ratio Decidendi: When there is an apparent difference of views between existing precedents of the court, the matter should be referred to a Bench of three Judges to ensure a definitive and authoritative resolution of the legal controversy.

Result: Registry directed to place the file before the Chief Justice for taking instructions for the constitution of a Bench of three Judges.