top of page


Suo Moto- Manvi

Updated: Nov 22, 2021

Literal meaning

On its motion


Suo Moto may be a Latin phrase that refers to an office, the court, or alternative central authority functioning on its suspicions. Simply put, it's getting over a scenario. Suo Moto relies on the construct of "Epistolary Jurisdiction," which originated within the late mid-1970 s of rendering to create the legal method a lot of accessible to the poor, socially and economically deprived. Suo Moto attention happens once a court decides to pursue a case on its own, like in circumstances of severe negligence on the aspect of public authorities or the govt., or whenever the Court sees a match. Once a court receives info regarding a violation of rights or breach of duty through the media or a third-party notification, it takes Suo Moto awareness of the case. The decide has the authority to issue orders on topics of public interest on his initiative, while not being self-addressed by any party.

Suo moto has been even in Bharat below Article 32 and Article 226 of the Constitution, granting the Supreme Court and supreme court exceptional power to create any directives to try to or stop from doing an act. In alternative words, a court acts Suo Moto once it believes a scenario demands a serious and fast judicial involvement. Article 131 of the Indian Constitution grants the Supreme Court suo moto power.


When a court receives information concerning a violation of rights or breach of duty through the media or a third-party notification, it takes Suo Moto Recognition of the case. Article 32 of the Indian Constitution and Article 226 of the Indian Constitution, respectively, establish the procedures for filing Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in India's Supreme Court and High Courts. As a result, the court now has the authority to take legal action upon receiving notice of a situation. Suo Moto actions by Indian courts are a manifestation of judicial activism, and the general public has been intrigued by the courts' fast delivery of justice.

Suo Moto matters are usually heard by the Supreme Court of India. For the past few years, the Indian judiciary has unquestionably carried the democratic baton. Several High Courts and the Supreme Court have risen to the occasion in the past by taking sole jurisdiction of a legal issue and delivering fast justice. Various Indian courts have launched legal actions on their own, based on media reports, telegrams, and letters from aggrieved parties, and have taken Suo Moto notice of the matter. Suo Moto action occurs when a High Court or Supreme Court takes control of a subject or issue on its own.

Suo moto jurisdiction has been exercised by Indian courts in the following cases -

Contempt of Court:

Contempt of court refers to disobedience to the court's rules and regulations, as well as a lack of knowledge of the court's code of conduct and ethics. In most cases, the court will file a Suo Moto contempt case against an official who interferes with the delivery of justice or jeopardizes the court's dignity. The courts could initiate Suo Moto contempt against an official UN agency that prevents the delivery of justice or challenges the dignity of the court by means that disobedience towards the court and mental object of rules and laws, code of conduct, and ethics followed during a court.

Reopen previous Cases:

Even if a case is as regards to being set and the new and substantial proof is uncovered, the courts have the authority to require Suo Moto action and open up the case for a recent trial.

The order sought for a replacement Case:

If a court believes that an aggrieved person or cluster of persons is being treated below the belt, the court will order AN investigation at any level by any office, as well as the department of local government, the CBI, and others. The court can also take such action when receiving a letter from a gaggle of individuals UN agency are affected or supported any news, documentary, or media supply.


A files proceedings against B (a hospital) for failing to admit AN accident victim UN agency died as a result of his injuries. In such a circumstance, A files AN petition during a court of law against B to start the legal proceedings.

However, if a court is knowledgeable by a story or alternative third-party sources that a hospital has been exposed for its unlawful practice of extorting cash before admitting patients UN agency required immediate treatment, the court could take suo moto action against the suspect facility. during this scenario, the court can appoint AN legal instrument to assist it.

Case Laws

The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Union of Bharat through the Law Secretary, Registrar General of all High Courts. Also, Director- General of Police of all States and Union Territories, Member Secretary of the National Legal Services Authority, and others taking suo moto recognition of the problem concerning the prompt trial of cases below Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881.

The National Human Rights Commission, India, has taken suo moto notice of media allegations that a person tried to offend a woman's modesty in Muzaffarpur, Bihar, and once failing, he poured fuel on her and set her afire. in line with the Commission, the contents of the news reports, if genuine, quantity to a major breach of the victim's human rights. As a result, it's sent notifications to the Chief Secretary and the Director-General of Police in Bihar, requesting a full report at intervals of four weeks.

The National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) has taken suo moto notice of a media report alleging that twenty individual and Civic Agency employees and attorney, were skinned in an alleged action in Howrah, West Bengal, on Gregorian calendar month twenty-four, 2019. inline with reports, the West Bengal Bar Council marked a black day across the state, a vocation for action against law enforcement officials, and has set to prevent operating until Gregorian calendar month twenty-nine in commonality with the lawyers of Howrah.

CASE 1- PAHALWAN/SURESH V. STATE S.P Pandey, Member:— These are two related review petitions filed under Order XLVII, Rule 1 read with Section 151 CPC, challenging the judgement? and order, dated 21.7.2004, passed by this Court in Revision Petition Nos. 38 and 37 of 1998-99/- Lalitpur, remanding the cases to the learned Collector, Lalitpur, for decision, anew


This writ petition was filed in the public interest after the Court took a suo moto action in response to a letter received in the High Court Registry on May 29, 2015, from Shri Krishan Kumar Jangid, bringing to the Court's attention the discrimination faced by "dwarfs" in public employment, as well as many other benefits and schemes offered by the State Government.


This D.B Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No. 9300/2014 was filed on the 10th of December, 2014, after the petitioners appeared in person and complained of a threat to his life and liberty. The Superintendent of Police, Nagaur, was ordered to produce a report, and the S.H.O., Police Station, Gotan, was ordered to give proper protection to the petitioners in the meantime.


Motion has been detected. On behalf of caveator/respondent no.1/contractor, Mr D.S.Chadha, Advocate receives the notice. Two revision petitions with the numbers 2685 and 2686 of 2018 will be dismissed by this order. The information is based on CR No.2685 dated 2018. The Special Commercial Court's order of February 23, 2018 (Annexure P-8) is the subject of this revision petition.

CASE 5-SURESH JAISWAL vs. U.P. State and Others

Shri Manish Kumar Pandey, learned counsel for the petitioner, Shri Neeraj Tripathi, learned Additional Advocate General, assisted by Shri Shashank Shekhar Singh, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel, and Shri Tarun Agarwal, learned counsel for the State Election Commission, were all heard.

This Larger Bench was established on the Chief Justice's orders following a referral from the Division Bench, as evidenced by the judgement and order dated September 29, 2015.


Suo moto activities are not unique to India and are especially rampant in the neighbouring religious nations, where rule of law, a vote-based democracy, and press freedom are all under threat. Regardless, someplace else in other custom-based law nations, there are either too few traces of it or none at all. In Canada, courts are only allowed to accept such notice if it is approved by a rule.

In Australia and South Africa, the concept is largely unknown. Courts in the United States and Brazil have affirmatively used such powers by broadening and enlarging the scope of petitions-inquiries brought before them.

138 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

INTRODUCTION- To curb the offences, the laws are put to force, is seen often that as and when a crime is committed, there is a well-established procedure, which is followed by the authorities and in c

INTRODUCTION The advancement in technology is done for the comfort of Society as a whole. This advancement affects the economy positively; job creation, Business Boom, Competition all are subsets of t

bottom of page