Judicial Precedents in India: Balancing Legal Certainty with Social Change

Precedent sits at the heart of Indian adjudication, supplying the consistency, predictability and certainty that a justice system needs. Under Article 141 of the Constitution, whatever law the Supreme Court declares is binding upon every court in the country. Yet this binding force produces a lasting strain between continuity and reform. Uniform decision-making strengthens the rule of law, but rigid loyalty to past rulings can keep alive readings that no longer fit constitutional values, social conditions or later legislation. To manage that strain, the Supreme Court has relied on distinguishing, overruling, referral for reconsideration and purposive constitutional interpretation. This paper traces the constitutional basis and justification of precedent in India, examines the dangers of inflexibility, and assesses how the Court has weighed stare decisis against constitutional growth. Its argument is that precedent is neither untouchable nor disposable at the whim of changing judicial taste; departures should rest on principled criteria, constitutional values, institutional legitimacy and real shifts in law or society.