Five New Judges Appointed to Supreme Court, Raising Strength to 37

On June 1, 2026, the Centre officially cleared the appointment of five new judges to the Supreme Court of India, raising its functional strength to 37. The appointees include four High Court Chief Justices and one direct elevation from the Bar. This follows a recent Ordinance in May 2026 that increased the Supreme Court’s sanctioned judge strength from 34 to 38. This expansion is a critical governance move aimed at reducing the massive backlog of pending cases and enabling the formation of more Constitution Benches.

What Happened

On June 1, 2026, the central government cleared the appointment of five new judges to the Supreme Court. This notification was issued after the Supreme Court Collegium recommended their names on May 27, 2026. The induction of these judges elevates the court's active working strength to 37, leaving only one vacancy against the recently updated sanctioned limit of 38.

When & Where

The appointments were officially notified by the Law Ministry in New Delhi on June 1, 2026. The newly appointed judges will take their oaths of office at the Supreme Court of India, officially beginning their tenures on the highest bench of the country.

Who Is Involved

President of India: Formally signed the warrants of appointment as the constitutional head.
Ministry of Law and Justice: Processed the Collegium's files; the announcement was made by MoS Arjun Ram Meghwal.
Supreme Court Collegium: Headed by the Chief Justice of India, it recommended the candidates.
The Appointees: Justice Sheel Nagu (CJ, Punjab & Haryana HC), Justice Shree Chandrashekhar (CJ, Bombay HC), Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva (CJ, Madhya Pradesh HC), Justice Arun Palli (CJ, J&K and Ladakh HC), and Senior Advocate V. Mohana.

How It Works

1. The Supreme Court Collegium identifies potential candidates based on merit, seniority, and regional representation.
2. The Collegium adopts a resolution and forwards the recommendation to the Union Ministry of Law and Justice.
3. The Law Ministry conducts background checks (often involving the Intelligence Bureau) and forwards the file to the Prime Minister.
4. The Prime Minister advises the President, who issues the formal warrant of appointment under Article 124(2).
5. The Chief Justice of India administers the oath of office to the newly appointed judges.

Why It Matters

Constitutional Significance: Showcases the functional machinery of Article 124 and the delicate balance of power between the executive and the judiciary.
Governance & Policy: Expanding the judicial strength is a direct administrative intervention to tackle the massive pendency of over 80,000 cases in the apex court.
Exam Relevance: Highly relevant for UPSC GS Paper 2 (Polity and Constitution), particularly regarding the separation of powers, judicial independence, and institutional structure.

Historical Background

1950: The Supreme Court was established with a sanctioned strength of just 8 judges (1 CJI + 7 judges).
1956: Parliament passed the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act to allow legislative control over judicial expansion.
2019: The sanctioned strength was increased from 31 to 34 judges to help manage the growing docket.

Previous Related Events

August 2014: Parliament passed the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act to replace the Collegium, which was later struck down by the SC in 2015.
2023–2024: Significant friction occurred between the Executive and the Judiciary over delayed notifications of Collegium recommendations.
May 5, 2026: The Centre promulgated an Ordinance proactively increasing the sanctioned strength from 34 to 38.

Static GK Connection

Article 124: Deals with the establishment and constitution of the Supreme Court, detailing the appointment, qualifications, and removal of judges.
Collegium System: A judicial innovation for appointments created through the "Three Judges Cases", not explicitly found in the original text of the Constitution.

India & World Comparison

India's Supreme Court strength is dynamic and frequently expanded by Parliament to handle a high volume of appeals. In contrast, the United States Supreme Court has maintained a fixed strength of 9 justices since 1869, acting strictly as a constitutional court taking up only 100–150 select cases annually. Additionally, India uses the unique "Collegium" system, whereas countries like the UK use an independent Judicial Appointments Commission.

Future Impact

Constitution Benches: A near-full court of 37/38 judges will allow the Chief Justice to constitute multiple 5-judge or 7-judge benches to resolve pending constitutional matters.
Legislative Action: The May 2026 Ordinance increasing the judge limit must be replaced by a formal legislative Bill in the upcoming Parliament session.
Judicial Reforms Focus: Simply adding judges is insufficient; future policy debates will likely pivot toward restricting Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) and proposing a National Court of Appeal.

🔑 Key Points for Revision

The Centre appointed five new judges to the Supreme Court on June 1, 2026.
The working strength of the Supreme Court has now increased to 37.
Sanctioned capacity was raised from 34 to 38 on May 5, 2026, via an Ordinance.
Appointments are mandated under Article 124(2) of the Constitution.
Warrants of appointment are officially signed by the President of India.
The Supreme Court Collegium consists of the CJI and the four senior-most judges.
Four of the appointees were serving Chief Justices of various High Courts.
Senior Advocate V. Mohana was elevated directly from the Bar to the Bench.
Article 124(3)(b) legally permits such direct elevations from the Bar.
The original sanctioned strength of the SC in 1950 was just 8 judges.
Parliament regulates SC judge strength through the 1956 Act.
Adding judges is aimed at tackling the pendency of over 80,000 cases.
The US Supreme Court, unlike India's, has a fixed strength of 9 justices.
The 99th Constitutional Amendment (NJAC) attempted to replace this system but failed.
The Collegium system gives the judiciary primacy over its own appointments.

🧠 Concept Link (Static GK Deep Dive)

Core Concept: The Collegium System & Judicial Appointments

Definition: A closed-door system where a forum comprising the Chief Justice of India and senior-most judges recommends appointments and transfers of higher judiciary judges.
Constitutional / Legal Basis: Evolved from interpreting Article 124(2) (Supreme Court) and Article 217 (High Courts). The word "Collegium" is not in the Constitution.
Scientific / Economic Principle: Grounded in the political theory of the "Separation of Powers" and the necessity of "Judicial Independence."
How it connects to this event: The five new judges were cleared by the Centre based solely on the binding recommendation of the Supreme Court Collegium.
Origin & History: Created through a series of Supreme Court judgments, firmly asserting judicial primacy in 1993.
Key milestone 1: First Judges Case (1981) — Ruled that the Executive had primacy in judicial appointments, minimizing the CJI's role.
Key milestone 2: Second Judges Case (1993) — Overturned the 1981 verdict, establishing the Collegium and making the CJI's advice binding on the President.
Related Acts / Schemes / Treaties: 99th Constitutional Amendment Act (2014) establishing the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC).
Nodal Ministry / Body: Department of Justice under the Union Ministry of Law and Justice.
India-specific relevance: Ensures the executive branch cannot pack the highest courts with political loyalists, preserving democratic checks.
Global comparison: India's system is highly unique; almost no other major democracy allows judges to exclusively appoint other judges without executive or public oversight.
Data point: Over 80,000 cases are pending in the Supreme Court, prompting the push for a higher judge strength.
Common exam angle: UPSC frequently tests the evolution of the Collegium (Three Judges Cases) and the conflict between the Executive and Judiciary over the NJAC.
Easy memory hook: "CJI + 4" makes the Supreme Court Collegium; "CJI + 2" makes the High Court Collegium.

❓ Practice MCQs

Q1. [Easy] Who has the constitutional authority to officially appoint judges to the Supreme Court of India?

A) Prime Minister

B) Chief Justice of India

C) President of India

D) Union Law Minister

Answer: C

Explanation: Under Article 124(2) of the Constitution, the President issues the warrant appointing Supreme Court judges.

Q2. [Easy] What is the current maximum sanctioned strength of judges in the Supreme Court of India following the May 2026 Ordinance?

A) 31

B) 34

C) 37

D) 38

Answer: D

Explanation: The sanctioned strength was increased from 34 to 38 via the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2026.

Q3. [Moderate] Which of the following is NOT a required qualification to be appointed as a Supreme Court judge under Article 124(3)?

A) Must be a citizen of India

B) Must have been a High Court judge for at least five years

C) Must have attained the age of 35 years

D) Must be a distinguished jurist in the opinion of the President

Answer: C

Explanation: The Indian Constitution does not prescribe a minimum age requirement for appointment as a judge of the Supreme Court.

Q4. [Moderate] The constitutional power to increase the number of judges in the Supreme Court rests with:

A) The President of India

B) The Parliament of India

C) The Chief Justice of India

D) The Law Commission of India

Answer: B

Explanation: Parliament is authorized to regulate the strength of the Supreme Court under Article 124(1), enacted practically via the 1956 Act.

Q5. [Moderate] Which constitutional amendment sought to replace the Collegium system with the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC)?

A) 97th Amendment

B) 98th Amendment

C) 99th Amendment

D) 100th Amendment

Answer: C

Explanation: The 99th Constitutional Amendment Act of 2014 established the NJAC, which the Supreme Court later struck down in 2015 for violating judicial independence.

Q6. [Tricky] Consider the elevation of Senior Advocate V. Mohana directly to the Supreme Court. Under which provision is this direct appointment from the Bar permitted?

A) Article 124(3)(a)

B) Article 124(3)(b)

C) Article 124(3)(c)

D) Article 143

Answer: B

Explanation: Article 124(3)(b) allows an advocate of a High Court with at least 10 years of standing to be appointed directly as an SC judge.

Q7. [Tricky] The Supreme Court Collegium that recommends the appointment of Supreme Court judges consists of:

A) The CJI and the two senior-most judges

B) The CJI and the four senior-most judges

C) The CJI, the Union Law Minister, and two senior judges

D) The CJI and all sitting judges of the Supreme Court

Answer: B

Explanation: Since the Third Judges Case (1998), the SC Collegium for Supreme Court appointments comprises the CJI and the four senior-most judges.

Q8. [Tricky] Which of the following statements about the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court is entirely correct?

A) The original strength in 1950 was 10, and it can only be altered by a Constitutional Amendment.

B) The original strength in 1950 was 8, and it can be altered by a simple legislative Act of Parliament.

C) The original strength in 1950 was 8, and it is altered by the President's executive order.

D) The strength of the Supreme Court is determined dynamically by the Collegium based on pendency.

Answer: B

Explanation: The original strength was 8 (1 CJI + 7 judges), and it is amended via the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act without needing a formal constitutional amendment under Article 368.

📜 Previous Year Question Style (PYQ)

PYQ 1:

With reference to the Supreme Court of India, who possesses the authority to increase the number of judges?

A) President of India

B) Parliament of India

C) Chief Justice of India

D) Law Commission of India

Answer: B

Explanation: Article 124(1) of the Constitution grants Parliament the power to increase the number of judges by law.

PYQ 2:

Consider the following statements:

1. The Collegium system is explicitly mentioned in Article 124 of the Indian Constitution.
2. A distinguished jurist, in the opinion of the President, can be appointed as a judge of the Supreme Court.
3. The retirement age of a Supreme Court judge is 65 years.

Which of the above statements is/are correct?

A) 1 and 2 only

B) 2 and 3 only

C) 1 and 3 only

D) 1, 2, and 3

Answer: B

Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect because the word "Collegium" is completely absent from the Constitution; it is a judicial creation. Statements 2 and 3 are correct under Article 124.

PYQ 3:

Assertion (A): The Supreme Court Collegium for appointing SC judges currently comprises the Chief Justice of India and the four senior-most judges.

Reason (R): The Second Judges Case (1993) expanded the collegium to include the four senior-most judges to ensure a plurality of views.

A) Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A.

B) Both A and R are true but R is not the correct explanation of A.

C) A is true but R is false.

D) A is false but R is true.

Answer: C

Explanation: While Assertion (A) is true, Reason (R) is false. The Collegium was expanded to include the four senior-most judges in the Third Judges Case (1998), not the Second Judges Case (1993).

✍️ Mains Answer Pointers

Question 1 (150 words): "The Collegium system of judicial appointments balances judicial independence with executive participation." Discuss the process of appointment of Supreme Court judges in light of this statement.

Introduction: Briefly define the Collegium system (CJI + 4 senior judges) and its constitutional origin under Article 124(2).
Body Point 1: Judicial Primacy: Explains how the Collegium's recommendations are binding, securing independence from political interference (Second Judges Case).
Body Point 2: Executive Check: Highlights the executive's role in conducting IB background checks and their power to return a file once for reconsideration.
Body Point 3: Operational Issues: Mentions persistent criticisms regarding opacity, lack of a formal secretariat, and friction leading to delayed appointments.
Conclusion: Conclude with the need for a Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) that ensures transparency without compromising judicial independence.
Data/Diagram to include: A simple flowchart: Collegium → Law Ministry → Prime Minister → President.

Question 2 (250 words): Increasing the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court is a necessary but insufficient step towards tackling the massive pendency of cases in India. Analyze.

Introduction: Mention the recent May 2026 Ordinance increasing judge strength from 34 to 38, contextualized against a massive pendency of over 80,000 cases.
Body Point 1: Constitutional Backing: Trace the evolution from 8 judges in 1950 to 38 today via parliamentary acts.
Body Point 2: Why Increase is Necessary: More judges allow for simultaneous Constitution Benches (5/7 judges) to resolve critical democratic questions without halting regular appeals.
Body Point 3: Systemic Bottlenecks (Why it is Insufficient): Highlight procedural delays, chronic adjournments, and inadequate judicial infrastructure in lower courts.
Body Point 4: Economic Dimension: Prolonged commercial disputes freeze capital and deter foreign investment; fixing only the apex tier doesn't solve trial court delays.
Body Point 5: International Comparison: The US Supreme Court hears ~100 cases a year, while India's SC acts as a routine court of appeal rather than a purely constitutional court.
Body Point 6: Policy Alternatives: Discuss limiting Special Leave Petitions (SLPs), deploying AI for case management, and forming Regional Courts of Appeal.
Conclusion: Sum up that structural reforms must accompany numerical expansion to deliver timely justice.
Data/Diagram to include: A trendline or mention of pendency growth versus judge strength increments over the decades.

⚠️ Examiner Trap

Trap 1: Students often confuse the authority to increase judge strength with the President. The correct fact is that only Parliament has the power to increase the number of SC judges via legislation.
Trap 2: A common wrong assumption is that the "Collegium System" is written in the Constitution. The reality is that the term is entirely a judicial invention stemming from the 1993 Second Judges Case.
Trap 3: Many students miss that a "distinguished jurist" can be appointed to the Supreme Court, but assume it applies to High Courts as well. Always remember this provision exists ONLY for the Supreme Court under Article 124, not for High Courts under Article 217.

🧭 Exam Tip

For Prelims, examiners heavily target the specific constitutional articles (Art 124 vs Art 217), the exact composition of the Collegium (CJI + 4), and the fact that Parliament controls judge strength. For Mains, questions in GS Paper 2 will bypass the raw numbers and ask you to analyze the friction between the Executive and Judiciary or evaluate alternatives to the Collegium system like the NJAC. In interview rounds, candidates may be asked to balance transparency with judicial independence. High-probability prediction: Expect a Prelims statement-based question testing the difference between the qualifications of a Supreme Court judge versus a High Court judge.

Five New Judges Appointed to Supreme Court, Raising Strength to 37

What Happened

When & Where

Who Is Involved

President of India: Formally signed the warrants of appointment as the constitutional head.
Ministry of Law and Justice: Processed the Collegium's files; the announcement was made by MoS Arjun Ram Meghwal.
Supreme Court Collegium: Headed by the Chief Justice of India, it recommended the candidates.
The Appointees: Justice Sheel Nagu (CJ, Punjab & Haryana HC), Justice Shree Chandrashekhar (CJ, Bombay HC), Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva (CJ, Madhya Pradesh HC), Justice Arun Palli (CJ, J&K and Ladakh HC), and Senior Advocate V. Mohana.

How It Works

Why It Matters

Constitutional Significance: Showcases the functional machinery of Article 124 and the delicate balance of power between the executive and the judiciary.
Governance & Policy: Expanding the judicial strength is a direct administrative intervention to tackle the massive pendency of over 80,000 cases in the apex court.
Exam Relevance: Highly relevant for UPSC GS Paper 2 (Polity and Constitution), particularly regarding the separation of powers, judicial independence, and institutional structure.

Historical Background

1950: The Supreme Court was established with a sanctioned strength of just 8 judges (1 CJI + 7 judges).
1956: Parliament passed the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act to allow legislative control over judicial expansion.
2019: The sanctioned strength was increased from 31 to 34 judges to help manage the growing docket.

Previous Related Events

August 2014: Parliament passed the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act to replace the Collegium, which was later struck down by the SC in 2015.
2023–2024: Significant friction occurred between the Executive and the Judiciary over delayed notifications of Collegium recommendations.
May 5, 2026: The Centre promulgated an Ordinance proactively increasing the sanctioned strength from 34 to 38.

Static GK Connection

Article 124: Deals with the establishment and constitution of the Supreme Court, detailing the appointment, qualifications, and removal of judges.
Collegium System: A judicial innovation for appointments created through the "Three Judges Cases", not explicitly found in the original text of the Constitution.

India & World Comparison

Future Impact

Constitution Benches: A near-full court of 37/38 judges will allow the Chief Justice to constitute multiple 5-judge or 7-judge benches to resolve pending constitutional matters.
Legislative Action: The May 2026 Ordinance increasing the judge limit must be replaced by a formal legislative Bill in the upcoming Parliament session.
Judicial Reforms Focus: Simply adding judges is insufficient; future policy debates will likely pivot toward restricting Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) and proposing a National Court of Appeal.

🔑 Key Points for Revision

The Centre appointed five new judges to the Supreme Court on June 1, 2026.
The working strength of the Supreme Court has now increased to 37.
Sanctioned capacity was raised from 34 to 38 on May 5, 2026, via an Ordinance.
Appointments are mandated under Article 124(2) of the Constitution.
Warrants of appointment are officially signed by the President of India.
The Supreme Court Collegium consists of the CJI and the four senior-most judges.
Four of the appointees were serving Chief Justices of various High Courts.
Senior Advocate V. Mohana was elevated directly from the Bar to the Bench.
Article 124(3)(b) legally permits such direct elevations from the Bar.
The original sanctioned strength of the SC in 1950 was just 8 judges.
Parliament regulates SC judge strength through the 1956 Act.
Adding judges is aimed at tackling the pendency of over 80,000 cases.
The US Supreme Court, unlike India's, has a fixed strength of 9 justices.
The 99th Constitutional Amendment (NJAC) attempted to replace this system but failed.
The Collegium system gives the judiciary primacy over its own appointments.

🧠 Concept Link (Static GK Deep Dive)

Core Concept: The Collegium System & Judicial Appointments

Definition: A closed-door system where a forum comprising the Chief Justice of India and senior-most judges recommends appointments and transfers of higher judiciary judges.
Constitutional / Legal Basis: Evolved from interpreting Article 124(2) (Supreme Court) and Article 217 (High Courts). The word "Collegium" is not in the Constitution.
Scientific / Economic Principle: Grounded in the political theory of the "Separation of Powers" and the necessity of "Judicial Independence."
How it connects to this event: The five new judges were cleared by the Centre based solely on the binding recommendation of the Supreme Court Collegium.
Origin & History: Created through a series of Supreme Court judgments, firmly asserting judicial primacy in 1993.
Key milestone 1: First Judges Case (1981) — Ruled that the Executive had primacy in judicial appointments, minimizing the CJI's role.
Key milestone 2: Second Judges Case (1993) — Overturned the 1981 verdict, establishing the Collegium and making the CJI's advice binding on the President.
Related Acts / Schemes / Treaties: 99th Constitutional Amendment Act (2014) establishing the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC).
Nodal Ministry / Body: Department of Justice under the Union Ministry of Law and Justice.
India-specific relevance: Ensures the executive branch cannot pack the highest courts with political loyalists, preserving democratic checks.
Global comparison: India's system is highly unique; almost no other major democracy allows judges to exclusively appoint other judges without executive or public oversight.
Data point: Over 80,000 cases are pending in the Supreme Court, prompting the push for a higher judge strength.
Common exam angle: UPSC frequently tests the evolution of the Collegium (Three Judges Cases) and the conflict between the Executive and Judiciary over the NJAC.
Easy memory hook: "CJI + 4" makes the Supreme Court Collegium; "CJI + 2" makes the High Court Collegium.

❓ Practice MCQs

Q1. [Easy] Who has the constitutional authority to officially appoint judges to the Supreme Court of India?

A) Prime Minister

B) Chief Justice of India

C) President of India

D) Union Law Minister

Answer: C

Explanation: Under Article 124(2) of the Constitution, the President issues the warrant appointing Supreme Court judges.

Q2. [Easy] What is the current maximum sanctioned strength of judges in the Supreme Court of India following the May 2026 Ordinance?

A) 31

B) 34

C) 37

D) 38

Answer: D

Explanation: The sanctioned strength was increased from 34 to 38 via the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Ordinance, 2026.

Q3. [Moderate] Which of the following is NOT a required qualification to be appointed as a Supreme Court judge under Article 124(3)?

A) Must be a citizen of India

B) Must have been a High Court judge for at least five years

C) Must have attained the age of 35 years

D) Must be a distinguished jurist in the opinion of the President

Answer: C

Explanation: The Indian Constitution does not prescribe a minimum age requirement for appointment as a judge of the Supreme Court.

Q4. [Moderate] The constitutional power to increase the number of judges in the Supreme Court rests with:

A) The President of India

B) The Parliament of India

C) The Chief Justice of India

D) The Law Commission of India

Answer: B

Explanation: Parliament is authorized to regulate the strength of the Supreme Court under Article 124(1), enacted practically via the 1956 Act.

Q5. [Moderate] Which constitutional amendment sought to replace the Collegium system with the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC)?

A) 97th Amendment

B) 98th Amendment

C) 99th Amendment

D) 100th Amendment

Answer: C

Explanation: The 99th Constitutional Amendment Act of 2014 established the NJAC, which the Supreme Court later struck down in 2015 for violating judicial independence.

Q6. [Tricky] Consider the elevation of Senior Advocate V. Mohana directly to the Supreme Court. Under which provision is this direct appointment from the Bar permitted?

A) Article 124(3)(a)

B) Article 124(3)(b)

C) Article 124(3)(c)

D) Article 143

Answer: B

Explanation: Article 124(3)(b) allows an advocate of a High Court with at least 10 years of standing to be appointed directly as an SC judge.

Q7. [Tricky] The Supreme Court Collegium that recommends the appointment of Supreme Court judges consists of:

A) The CJI and the two senior-most judges

B) The CJI and the four senior-most judges

C) The CJI, the Union Law Minister, and two senior judges

D) The CJI and all sitting judges of the Supreme Court

Answer: B

Explanation: Since the Third Judges Case (1998), the SC Collegium for Supreme Court appointments comprises the CJI and the four senior-most judges.

Q8. [Tricky] Which of the following statements about the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court is entirely correct?

A) The original strength in 1950 was 10, and it can only be altered by a Constitutional Amendment.

B) The original strength in 1950 was 8, and it can be altered by a simple legislative Act of Parliament.

C) The original strength in 1950 was 8, and it is altered by the President's executive order.

D) The strength of the Supreme Court is determined dynamically by the Collegium based on pendency.

Answer: B

Explanation: The original strength was 8 (1 CJI + 7 judges), and it is amended via the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act without needing a formal constitutional amendment under Article 368.

📜 Previous Year Question Style (PYQ)

PYQ 1:

With reference to the Supreme Court of India, who possesses the authority to increase the number of judges?

A) President of India

B) Parliament of India

C) Chief Justice of India

D) Law Commission of India

Answer: B

Explanation: Article 124(1) of the Constitution grants Parliament the power to increase the number of judges by law.

PYQ 2:

Consider the following statements:

Which of the above statements is/are correct?

A) 1 and 2 only

B) 2 and 3 only

C) 1 and 3 only

D) 1, 2, and 3

Answer: B

Explanation: Statement 1 is incorrect because the word "Collegium" is completely absent from the Constitution; it is a judicial creation. Statements 2 and 3 are correct under Article 124.

PYQ 3:

Assertion (A): The Supreme Court Collegium for appointing SC judges currently comprises the Chief Justice of India and the four senior-most judges.

Reason (R): The Second Judges Case (1993) expanded the collegium to include the four senior-most judges to ensure a plurality of views.

A) Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A.

B) Both A and R are true but R is not the correct explanation of A.

C) A is true but R is false.

D) A is false but R is true.

Answer: C

✍️ Mains Answer Pointers

Introduction: Briefly define the Collegium system (CJI + 4 senior judges) and its constitutional origin under Article 124(2).
Body Point 1: Judicial Primacy: Explains how the Collegium's recommendations are binding, securing independence from political interference (Second Judges Case).
Body Point 2: Executive Check: Highlights the executive's role in conducting IB background checks and their power to return a file once for reconsideration.
Body Point 3: Operational Issues: Mentions persistent criticisms regarding opacity, lack of a formal secretariat, and friction leading to delayed appointments.
Conclusion: Conclude with the need for a Memorandum of Procedure (MoP) that ensures transparency without compromising judicial independence.
Data/Diagram to include: A simple flowchart: Collegium → Law Ministry → Prime Minister → President.

Question 2 (250 words): Increasing the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court is a necessary but insufficient step towards tackling the massive pendency of cases in India. Analyze.

Introduction: Mention the recent May 2026 Ordinance increasing judge strength from 34 to 38, contextualized against a massive pendency of over 80,000 cases.
Body Point 1: Constitutional Backing: Trace the evolution from 8 judges in 1950 to 38 today via parliamentary acts.
Body Point 2: Why Increase is Necessary: More judges allow for simultaneous Constitution Benches (5/7 judges) to resolve critical democratic questions without halting regular appeals.
Body Point 3: Systemic Bottlenecks (Why it is Insufficient): Highlight procedural delays, chronic adjournments, and inadequate judicial infrastructure in lower courts.
Body Point 4: Economic Dimension: Prolonged commercial disputes freeze capital and deter foreign investment; fixing only the apex tier doesn't solve trial court delays.
Body Point 5: International Comparison: The US Supreme Court hears ~100 cases a year, while India's SC acts as a routine court of appeal rather than a purely constitutional court.
Body Point 6: Policy Alternatives: Discuss limiting Special Leave Petitions (SLPs), deploying AI for case management, and forming Regional Courts of Appeal.
Conclusion: Sum up that structural reforms must accompany numerical expansion to deliver timely justice.
Data/Diagram to include: A trendline or mention of pendency growth versus judge strength increments over the decades.

⚠️ Examiner Trap

Trap 1: Students often confuse the authority to increase judge strength with the President. The correct fact is that only Parliament has the power to increase the number of SC judges via legislation.
Trap 2: A common wrong assumption is that the "Collegium System" is written in the Constitution. The reality is that the term is entirely a judicial invention stemming from the 1993 Second Judges Case.
Trap 3: Many students miss that a "distinguished jurist" can be appointed to the Supreme Court, but assume it applies to High Courts as well. Always remember this provision exists ONLY for the Supreme Court under Article 124, not for High Courts under Article 217.