The policy of the court to stand by precedent is termed as Stare decisis.

In a literal sense, it means “to stand by decided matters”. The phrase

“stare decisis” is itself short of the Latin phrase “stare decisis et non quieta
movere”. This phrase means “to stand by decisions and not to disturb
settled matters”.

Sources of Law – Concept of Stare Decisis

The doctrine of precedent refers to the doctrine that the court is to follow
judicial decisions in earlier cases when the same points relating to the
law are present before it in subsequent matters.

The concept of stare decisis furthers three primary goals. Firstly the
doctrine promotes confidence amongst the citizens to plan their
economic and social transactions.

It does this by providing them the confidence that they are in compliance
with the law. It also encourages private settlement of the disputes as the
court may infer its decision on the basis of this doctrine.

Secondly, it reduces the need to relitigate on the cases on which the

judgment has already been passed. It discourages the rush of fresh
litigation whenever a change in the judge/ bench occurs.

Third, it promotes public confidence in the judiciary as it reduces and

puts constraints on the judges’ power. The doctrine helps the judges to
judge in a predictable and non-chaotic manner.

Foundation of Stare Decisis

The guiding principle behind the doctrine of stare decisis is the

maintenance of consistency and certainty. A good level of predictability,
stability, and certainty is the need for the legal system. Precedent appeals
to primary desires in a system of laws that is justified expectations of—
rationality, regularity, and stability.
It satisfies that in case of all other things being equal, a legal system
should resolve the matter in similarity irrespective of the different
judiciary. It discourages successive relitigation of the issues that have
already been authoritatively resolved.

The doctrine of stare decisis in India

The doctrine of stare decisis in its present form appears to not have
existed in India during the pre-British era. Post-establishment of British
rule in the country the concept of binding precedent came to be
applicable in India.

Hierarchy of courts, as well as reporting of decisions, are the two

preconditions for the doctrine of stare decisis. The Indian Constitution
by way of Article 141 makes the ‘law declared’ by the Supreme Court
binding on all courts within the territory in India.

Precedents and treatment by higher courts

For a case that has been earlier decided by a lower court the higher court
can do the following:

Reverse: The decision and the initial decision will cease to have any
effect

Overrule Wherein a later case a higher court decides that the decision
on the first case is wrong. It overrules the decision of the lower court

Refusal to follow: Where the court cannot reverse or overrule the

decision but does not wish to follow or refuses to follow the decision.

Distinguish: Where the material facts of the case differ and the
principles decided in the precedence is too narrow to be properly applied
to the new set of facts.

Exceptions or doctrine of prospective overruling:

Although the courts follow the principle of precedent in the normal
course, the higher forums may overrule the decisions that may be
erroneous or which do not hold good in view of the new circumstance.
The court may overrule a decision where it is recent or there is divided
opinion.

Also, it can overrule a decision where the decision is unclear, vague,

cause inconvenience and hardship or the error in the prior decision
cannot be easily rectified by the legislative process. Once overruled, an
earlier decision is no longer a binding precedent.

In a case of overruling the judgment of an earlier case, the re-opening of

old disputes on the ground of a change in the legal position may arise.
Consequently, a multiplicity of proceedings may also arise.

Solved Example on Stare Decisis

Question: Supreme Court has given a decision on the selection

procedure for an examination. An individual Amar challenges the
selection procedure of some other exam in a lower court. Will the
decision of the Supreme court bind the lower court?

Ans:

According to the doctrine of Stare decisis the lower court has to stand by
the precedent. Also, it needs to decide the case in line with the earlier
case if the facts of the case are similar. However, as the examination in
respect of which the Supreme Court gave decision is not the same as the
one for which Amar challenges in the lower court, the lower court can
also give a decision otherwise.