Under which law it is prescribed that all proceedings in the Supreme Court of India shall be in English language ?

1. The Integrated Judicial System in India (basic)

Hello! It is wonderful to have you here as we begin our journey into the Supreme Court of India. To truly understand how the Supreme Court functions, we must first look at the foundation: the Integrated Judicial System. Unlike some federal countries where the judiciary is divided, India adopted a 'top-down' approach to justice. Imagine a pyramid: the Supreme Court sits at the very peak, High Courts occupy the middle tier at the state level, and the Subordinate Courts (District and Lower Courts) form the broad base Indian Polity, Salient Features of the Constitution, p.30.

The most distinctive feature of this system is that it is a single system of courts. This means that whether a law is passed by the Parliament (Central law) or by a State Legislature (State law), the same set of courts will hear the case. This is a significant departure from the dual system found in the United States, where federal laws are handled by federal courts and state laws by state courts. In India, we have a dual polity (separate governments for Centre and States) but no dual system of justice. This was intentionally designed to ensure uniformity and eliminate 'diversities in remedial procedure' across the country Indian Polity, Centre-State Relations, p.151.

To keep this machinery running smoothly as one unit, certain rules of uniformity are strictly followed. For instance, Article 348(1) of the Constitution mandates that proceedings in the Supreme Court and every High Court shall be in English, unless Parliament decides otherwise. While Governors can authorize Hindi or regional languages in High Courts with the President's consent, the Supreme Court continues to function exclusively in English to maintain a cohesive legal standard across the nation Introduction to the Constitution of India, Languages, p.468.

Feature	Indian Judicial System	USA Judicial System
Structure	Integrated (Single Hierarchy)	Dual (Federal and State)
Law Enforcement	One court enforces both Central & State laws	Federal courts for Federal laws; State courts for State laws
Nature	Uniform remedial procedure	Diversity in state procedures

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.), Salient Features of the Constitution, p.30; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.), Centre-State Relations, p.151; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), LANGUAGES, p.468

2. Constitutional Provisions for the Supreme Court (basic)

To understand the Supreme Court (SC), we must first look at its constitutional home. The provisions relating to the organization, independence, jurisdiction, powers, and procedures of the Supreme Court are enshrined in Articles 124 to 147 in Part V of the Constitution. Think of these articles as the "blueprints" that ensure the SC remains the highest judicial forum and the final interpreter of the Constitution Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Chapter 26, p.296.

One of the most important starting points is Article 124(1), which establishes the Court and its composition. Interestingly, the Constitution does not fix a permanent number of judges; instead, it gives Parliament the authority to increase the strength as the workload grows. While the Court began in 1950 with just 8 judges, Parliament has stepped in multiple times to expand this number to meet the demands of a growing nation Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Chapter 26, p.285.

Another unique constitutional mandate involves the language of the Court. Under Article 348(1), the Constitution explicitly states that all proceedings in the Supreme Court shall be in the English language until Parliament provides otherwise by law. While Governors can authorize the use of Hindi or regional languages in High Courts (with the President’s consent), no such provision exists for the Supreme Court. This ensures that legal arguments and judgments remain uniform and accessible to legal practitioners from every corner of India’s diverse landscape Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Chapter 33, p.468.

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth, Chapter 26: Supreme Court, p.285, 296; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu, Chapter 33: Languages, p.468

3. Jurisdiction and Rule-Making Powers (Article 145) (intermediate)

To ensure the independence of the judiciary, the Supreme Court is empowered under Article 145 to frame its own rules for regulating its practice and procedure. Think of this as the Court’s 'housekeeping' power—it allows the SC to decide how benches are constituted, how many judges hear a case, and how 'Advocates-on-Record' are registered. However, this power is not absolute. As noted in D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, THE SUPREME COURT, p.344, these rules are subject to two major checks: they must align with the laws made by Parliament, and as a form of subordinate legislation, they cannot override any provision of the Constitution itself. Furthermore, any such rules require the approval of the President before they come into effect. One of the most significant procedural mandates is the language of the Court. Under Article 348(1), the Constitution explicitly states that until Parliament provides otherwise, all proceedings in the Supreme Court must be conducted in English. While the Governor of a state can authorize the use of Hindi or a regional language in a High Court (with the President’s consent), no such exception exists for the Supreme Court M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Official Language, p.542. This ensures a high degree of technical precision and uniformity in the highest court of the land, where judgments serve as binding precedents for every other court in India. Beyond administrative rules, the Court’s jurisdiction is incredibly broad, particularly through Article 136, which grants the Court discretionary power to grant 'Special Leave' to appeal. This isn't a right of the litigant, but a 'safety valve' for the Court to step in whenever there is a gross miscarriage of justice D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, THE SUPREME COURT, p.350. While the Court handles its own procedure, Parliament retains the overarching power to expand the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction or change its organization by law D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, THE SUPREME COURT, p.339.

Feature	Rule-Making Power (Art. 145)	Language of SC (Art. 348)
Authority	Supreme Court (with President's approval)	Constitution (Parliament can change by law)
Standard	Subordinate to Parliamentary Law	Exclusively English
Purpose	Internal practice and procedure	Uniformity and legal clarity

Sources: Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), THE SUPREME COURT, p.344; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth (7th ed.), Official Language, p.542; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), THE SUPREME COURT, p.350; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), THE SUPREME COURT, p.339

4. Official Language of the Union (Part XVII) (basic)

When we discuss the Supreme Court, we often focus on its judgments, but the language in which those judgments are delivered is a matter of constitutional mandate. Under Part XVII of the Indian Constitution, Articles 343 to 351 deal with Official Languages, categorizing them into four heads: the language of the Union, regional languages, special directives, and critically for us, the language of the judiciary Indian Polity, Chapter 73, p.540.

According to Article 348(1), until Parliament provides otherwise by law, all proceedings in the Supreme Court and every High Court shall be conducted in the English language. This includes not just the oral arguments, but also the authoritative texts of all bills, acts, orders, rules, and importantly, the judgments and decrees of the courts. The logic behind this was to maintain uniformity and precision in legal interpretation across the country's higher judiciary Introduction to the Constitution of India, Chapter 33, p.468.

It is vital to distinguish between the rules for High Courts and the Supreme Court. While there is a provision for High Courts to use Hindi or other regional languages (with the Governor’s authorization and the President’s consent), no such provision exists for the Supreme Court. Only an Act of Parliament can change the language of the Supreme Court. Since Parliament has not passed such a law, English remains the exclusive language of the apex court Indian Polity, Chapter 73, p.542.

Feature	Supreme Court	High Courts
Default Language	English	English
Who can change it?	Only Parliament (by law)	Governor (with President's consent) OR Parliament
Current Status	Exclusively English	English (Hindi/Regional allowed in some states like UP, Bihar, MP, Rajasthan)

Sources: Indian Polity, Chapter 73: Official Language, p.540-542; Introduction to the Constitution of India, Chapter 33: Languages, p.468

5. Regional Languages and State Legislatures (intermediate)

To understand the linguistic landscape of Indian governance, we must distinguish between the administrative language of a state and the judicial language of the higher courts. Under Article 345, a State Legislature has the constitutional autonomy to adopt any one or more languages in use in the state, or Hindi, as its official language for all or any official purposes D. D. Basu, Introduction to the Constitution of India, Chapter 33, p.468. This allows for regional identity to be reflected in state administration. However, this power is not absolute; until a state law is passed, English remains the default language for official state business.

While states have the freedom to choose their official language, the Supreme Court of India operates under a much stricter linguistic regime. According to Article 348(1), all proceedings in the Supreme Court and every High Court must be in the English language until Parliament provides otherwise by law M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Chapter 73, p.542. This creates a unique situation where a state might conduct its legislative and executive business in a regional language (like Tamil or Marathi), yet the High Court within that state and the Supreme Court in New Delhi maintain English as the primary medium to ensure legal uniformity across the Union.

There is, however, a nuanced mechanism for High Courts that does not exist for the Supreme Court. Under Article 348(2) and the Official Languages Act of 1963, the Governor of a state, with the previous consent of the President, can authorize the use of Hindi or the state's official language in the proceedings of the High Court. Crucially, this exception does not extend to the Supreme Court; its hearings, petitions, and judgments remain exclusively in English M. Laxmikanth, Indian Polity, Chapter 73, p.542.

Authority / Provision	Article 345 (State Language)	Article 347 (Presidential Power)
Primary Actor	State Legislature	President of India
Requirement	Language must be "in use" in the state.	A "substantial portion" of the population must desire its recognition.
Purpose	General official use within the state.	To protect the interests of linguistic minorities.

Sources: Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), Chapter 33: LANGUAGES, p.468-469; Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth (7th ed.), Chapter 73: Official Language, p.541-542

6. Language in the Higher Judiciary (Article 348) (exam-level)

In our journey through the Supreme Court’s architecture, we must address a vital practical question: In what language does justice speak? Article 348(1) of the Constitution provides the definitive answer. It mandates that, until Parliament provides otherwise by law, all proceedings in the Supreme Court and every High Court shall be conducted in the English language. This was intended to maintain uniformity, precision, and a common legal vocabulary across the Indian judicial system M. Laxmikanth, Official Language, p.542.

While the rule seems rigid, there is a distinct difference in how it applies to the Supreme Court versus the High Courts. For the Supreme Court, the use of English is absolute. Even though Article 145 empowers the Court to make rules for its own procedure, it cannot override the constitutional mandate of Article 348 regarding language. Consequently, all petitions, oral arguments, and judgments in the Apex Court continue to be exclusively in English D. D. Basu, Languages, p.468.

The High Courts, however, have a bit more flexibility. Under Article 348(2) and the Official Languages Act, 1963, the Governor of a State can authorize the use of Hindi or any other official language of the State in the proceedings of the High Court. However, this requires the prior consent of the President. It is important to note that even if such authorization is given for proceedings, the judgments, decrees, or orders of the High Court must still be accompanied by an English translation until Parliament decides otherwise M. Laxmikanth, Official Language, p.542.

Feature	Supreme Court	High Courts
Primary Language	English only	English (Default)
Power to Change	Only Parliament (by law)	Governor (with President's consent) for Hindi/State language
Authoritative Text	English	English (Judgments/Orders)

Sources: Indian Polity, M. Laxmikanth(7th ed.), Chapter 73: Official Language, p.542; Introduction to the Constitution of India, D. D. Basu (26th ed.), Chapter 33: Languages, p.468

7. Solving the Original PYQ (exam-level)

You have recently explored the diverse linguistic landscape of India and the structured hierarchy of our judiciary. This question serves as the perfect bridge between Part XVII (Official Languages) and the functioning of the Union Judiciary. While your studies likely touched upon Article 343 regarding the official language of the Union, the Constitution provides a specific, overriding framework for the higher judiciary to ensure legal precision and national uniformity. This question tests your ability to pinpoint exactly where that authority resides—whether in a rulebook, an act of Parliament, or the Constitution itself.

To arrive at the correct answer, (D) Article 348 of the Constitution of India, you must recognize the distinction between enabling powers and foundational mandates. As explained in Indian Polity by M. Laxmikanth, Article 348(1) is the definitive source that mandates the use of English in the Supreme Court and High Courts until Parliament decides otherwise. Even though Article 145 allows the Supreme Court to frame its own rules, those rules are subject to the provisions of the Constitution and any law made by Parliament. Therefore, the requirement for English is not a mere court rule, but a constitutional directive designed to maintain a consistent body of legal precedents across a linguistically diverse nation.

UPSC frequently uses Article 145 as a trap because it deals with court "practice and procedure," leading students to assume language falls under this category. Similarly, The Supreme Court Rules, 1966 are secondary legislations that must conform to the Constitution, not set the primary language requirement. Finally, while a Legislation made by the Parliament has the power to change this status quo, the current legal basis remains the original constitutional provision. Mastering this hierarchy—knowing when a provision is self-executing versus when it requires parliamentary action—is a critical skill for the Prelims exam.