Suo Moto Cognizance:

 Suo Moto cognizance is a Latin term which means an action taken by a government agency, court or
other central authority on their own apprehension. A court takes a Suo Moto Cognizance of a legal matter
when it receives information about the violation of rights or breach of duty through media or a third
party’s notification. In India, Article 32 of the Indian Constitution  and Article 226 of the Indian
Constitution lay down the provisions for filing Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in India in Supreme Court
and High Courts respectively. This has given rise to the court's’ power to initiate legal action on their
cognizance of a matter. Suo Moto’s actions by Indian courts are a reflection of activism by the judiciary
and captivated the general public with the speedy delivery of justice by the courts. Suo Moto cases in
India are generally taken up by the Supreme Court. The Indian Judiciary has been undoubtedly holding
the baton for democracy for the past few years. In numerous instances, different High Courts and the
Supreme Court have risen to the occasion by taking cognizance of a legal issue on their own and provided
swift justice. Various courts in India have initiated legal proceedings on their own based on media
reports, telegrams and letters received by aggrieved people, taking a Suo Moto cognizance of the issue.
Suo Moto action is when a High Court or Supreme Court on its own take control over the matter or the
case.

Advocate Arif Khan Makki says, “The rationale behind the Suo Moto actions of the High Courts and The
Supreme Court is the desire to deliver justice to everyone, even to the people who might not able to afford
it.”

“The courts by taking Suo Moto cognizance have many times put themselves in the shoes of the
legislature and executives by supervising them. Policymaking is a realm of the legislature and the
executive, however, through judicial activism that line has been blurred,” adds Advocate Arif Khan
Makki.

The Indian courts have taken Suo Moto cognizance in the following instances:

Contempt of Court: Contempt of court means disobedience towards the court and ignorance of rules and
regulations, code of conduct and ethics followed in a court. The court generally initiates a case for Suo
Moto contempt against an officer who prevents the delivery of justice or challenges the dignity of the
court.

Reopen Old Cases: If some new and substantial evidence is discovered after a case is closed, the courts
have the power to take Suo Moto action and reopen the case to try it again.

Order probe for a New Case: If any court is of the opinion that some injustice is being done to an
aggrieved person or a section of people, the court can order probe at any level by any government
authority, police department, the CBI, etc. The court may also take such action after receiving a letter
from the affected section of people or on the basis of any news, documentary or media source.
Table of Content:

Suo Moto Cases in India:

Suo Moto Cognizance in Murthal Rape Case
Suo Moto Cognizance by Supreme Court:

Suo Moto Cases in India:

There have been numerous cases in India where the Indian courts have taken Suo Moto cognizance in the
matters based upon a letter or a report and have passed judgments in such cases in the public interest. Suo
Moto action by the courts has given hope to the general public that the wrong done to the public at large
will be corrected by the courts by taking Suo Moto Cognizance. Suo Moto’s power of supreme court has
been provided under Article 131 of the Indian Constitution. Suo Moto in India has ensured that justice
should prevail in the civil as well as criminal matters. Suo Moto in the Indian Constitution has been
widely recognized and Indian judiciary time and again has proved its power by taking up Suo Moto cases.

Suo Moto Cognizance in Murthal Rape Case

Recently, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has taken Suo Moto Cognizance in Murthal rape case in
which many senior police officers of Haryana came to Sukhdev Dhaba to escort the women to Delhi
border. The court has asked the State Government for the call details of the IG, DSP, SHO, SP and other
junior rank officers who were present in Murthal area that night. The Jammu & Kashmir High Court
recently took Suo Moto Cognizance and asked the State government to respond to deficiency and other
issues relating to the health sector of the state. The court took Suo Moto Cognizance of a newspaper
article titled ‘Medical Corruption’. The article contained an open letter by G.S. Grewal written to the
Prime Minister highlighting the excessive prices charged for medicines, malpractices of referring patients
to undergo unrequired diagnostic tests and medical examinations.

Suo Moto Cognizance by Supreme Court:

The Supreme Court also took Suo Moto Cognizance and asked the Central Government to work with
companies like Google, Yahoo, Facebook, and WhatsApp to suggest a list of keywords to block explicit
videos that depict rape, gang rape, and child pornography.

An NGO named Prajwala wrote a letter to the Chief Justice of India in 2015 and sent a pen drive
containing two videos. The letter asked the court to take appropriate measures against the culprits who
were committing gang rape in a video. The Supreme Court converted the letter into a PIL.
The High Courts and Supreme Court have started to play a predominant role in highlighting various
social issues and taking swift legal action against them on their own. The courts have become chief social
activists by giving interest to society’s paramount importance and instituting legal actions against the
State’s failure to uphold and protect the rights of its citizens.

Is judicial review Suo Moto?

Judicial Review is the power of the Courts to determine the constitutionality of the Legislative actions. It
is the power which allows the court to declare any legislative or executive actions of the government as
void on the basis of unconstitutionality if, in the Court’s opinion, such actions transgress the Constitution.
However, the court cannot Suo Moto decide the constitutionality of any government action unless moved
by an aggrieved party and also unless the determination of unconstitutionality be necessary for the
decision of the case. The legislature itself being the maker of law is not competent to determine the
constitutionality of any legislative Act. An unconcerned independent and impartial body like the court is
the proper authority to look into legislative lapses. This is necessary for the maintenance of the spirit of
democracy. However, there have been instances where the Court, Suo Moto exercised the power of
Judicial review where it came to the conclusion that certain orders have been passed illegally and in an
arbitrary manner.

What is the Suo Moto as per Indian law?

The Suo Moto has its genesis in the concept of “Epistolary Jurisdiction”, which emerged in the late
seventies through judicial activism in order to make the judicial process more accessible to poor, socially
and economically disadvantaged sections of the Society. Suo Moto cases are instances wherein the High
Courts and the Supreme court of India using their inherent powers initiate a hearing by taking cognizance
of any matter on its own, without anybody filing any appeal or writ petition. It is the article Article 32 and
Article 226 of the Indian Constitution enable the Supreme Court and High Courts respectively to issue
any directions to do or refrain to do an act. By virtue of these two Articles and also the emergence of
Public Interest Litigation has allowed these Courts to take up Suo Moto cases. The rationale for such
actions also draws upon the desire of the courts to broaden the reach of justice to those who might not be
able to access the court.

What is Suo Moto's power?

The Suo Moto has its genesis in the concept of “Epistolary Jurisdiction”, which emerged in the late
seventies through judicial activism in order to make the judicial process more accessible to poor, socially
and economically disadvantaged sections of the Society. Suo Moto cases are instances wherein the High
Courts and the Supreme court of India using their inherent powers initiate a hearing by taking cognizance
of any matter on its own, without anybody filing any appeal or writ petition. It is the article Article 32 and
Article 226 of the Indian Constitution enable the Supreme Court and High Courts respectively to issue
any directions to do or refrain to do an act. By virtue of these two Articles and also the emergence of
Public Interest Litigation has allowed these Courts to take up Suo Moto cases. The rationale for such
actions also draws upon the desire of the courts to broaden the reach of justice to those who might not be
able to access the court.

What is the Suo Moto petition?

When the court proceeds Suo Moto, using its jurisdictional powers and issues a Suo Moto writ on the
grounds of blatant violation of the law, to maintain public order, to prevent the gross constitutional
violation, to remedy grave injustice. The Suo Moto cognizance virtually presupposes the public at large as
one of the parties. Therefore after the court takes cognizance of a matter, it usually appoints amicus curiae
to assist the court.

In what cases can the court take Suo Moto action?

The ambit of Suo Moto action of the courts has not been defined in any statue or in any act, therefore
there are no bracketed instances where the courts can take Suo Moto cognizance. It has been evolved by
the judicial activism of the judges to consider the intent of the public at large. The court can take Suo
Moto cognizance where it deems fit. However, over the years it has been seen that the court through the
letters, media reports, etc. have taken Suo Moto cognizance where there has been a violation of basic
human rights, or of conduct of government policies, or violation of religious rights or other basic
fundamental rights, Fundamental duties of India etc. One such example is that when the Supreme Court
took Suo Moto cognizance of Delhi air pollution. The courts in many instances have also taken Suo Moto
cognizance of contempt of court, where ever the dignity of the court has been challenged or where
someone had tried to obstruct the delivery of justice.

The Court has the Suo Moto power to bring a case under its own jurisdiction, if it feels there has been
grave injustice done, one such example is the recent Unnao rape case. The powers granted to the courts
under Art 226 and Art 32 of the Indian Constitution is so wide that there cannot be made an exhaustive
list of the instances where the court can take Suo Moto cognizance.