3 Review(s)

This work offers a quantitative analysis of the Indian Supreme Court's decision-making process adopting a methodology which is unorthodox as well as innovative in the field of judicial research in India. It is unorthodox in the sense that it makes a complete departure from the mainstream writings of the Common Law traditions and shifts its focus from 'what the judges say in their opinions' to 'what do they do' by casting their votes in favour or against the parties involved in the controversies before them. The methodology is innovative to the extent that for the first time the individual judges' decision making behaviour has been subjected to a rigorous quantitative analysis in the overall institutional context. The book examines a whole range of factors which go as essential input into the Supreme Court's decision making process. Several assumptions relating to the appointment of judges in the Court, the Chief Justice and his leadership role, the business environment, the structural arrangement of its decision-making function, the nature of agreement and disagreement among the judges on the decision making panels and the value orientation of judges have been subjected to close scrutiny with a view to provide an understanding of how the decision-makers in the apex Court go about making decisions which are not only of great significance for the immediate parties involved but at times may have far reaching consequences for a large number of groups and sections of the Indian society.  Table of Contents Chapter 1: Jurimetrics: A Note on Methodology  Part I- The Decision Makers Chapter 2: Appointment of the Chief Justice of India  Chapter 3: Selection and Appointment of Judges  Part II- Institutional Environment  Chapter 4: Business of the Court  Chapter 5: Structure of Decision Making  Part III- Voting Behaviour  Chapter 6: Nature of Participation: Dissent, Concurrence and Unanimity  Chapter 7: Attitudes and Value Orientations  Part IV- Conclusion  Chapter 8: Conclusion.