In this blog post, the authors examine the constitutional status of advisory opinions issued under Article 143 of the Constitution and their relationship with binding judicial precedent. They argue that while advisory opinions may influence future interpretation, they cannot overrule or modify existing Supreme Court judgments unless the earlier ruling is expressly found to be per incuriam. The article explores the limits of the Court’s advisory jurisdiction, the doctrine of precedent, and the implications for constitutional certainty, judicial discipline, and the separation of powers in India’s legal framework. Continue reading Uncertain Sovereignty of Advisory Opinion: How Article 143 Views Alter Precedent Only by Replacing Per Incuriam Decisions