It is not necessary to refer to all the cases on the point. The broad guidelines are easily deducible from what has gone before. The possibility of further defining these guiding principles can be envisaged with further juridical experience, and when common jurisprudential values linking different national systems of law may make a consensual pattern possible. But that lies in the future.
In Waman Rao and Ors Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Others, by the Constitution Bench in the following extracts –
…..It is also true to say that for the application of the rule of stare decisis, it is not necessary that the earlier decision or decisions of longstanding should have considered and either accepted or rejected the particular argument which is advanced in the case on hand. Were it so, the previous decisions could more easily be treated as binding by applying the law of precedent and it will be unnecessary to take resort to the principle of stare decisis. It is therefore, sufficient for invoking the rule of stare decisis that a certain decision was arrived at on a question which arose or was argued, no matter on what reason the decision rests or what is the basis of the decision. In other words, for the purpose of applying the rule of stare decisis, it is unnecessary to enquire or determine as to what was the rationale of the earlier decision which is said to operate as stare decisis……A deliberate judicial decision made after hearing an argument on a question which arises in the case or is put in issue may constitute a precedent; and the precedent by long recognition may mature into stare decisis…………In fact, the full form of the principle, stare decisis et non quieta movere which means to stand by decision and not to disturb what is settled’, was put by Coke in its classic English version as: Those things which have been so often adjudged ought to rest in peace’…….The principle of stare decisis is regarded as a rule of policy which promotes predictability, certainty, uniformity and stability. The legal system, it is said, should furnish a clear guide for conduct so that people may plan their affairs with assurance against surprise. It is important to further fair and expeditious adjudication by eliminating the need to relitigate every proposition in every case….. (It is important) for judges to conform to a certain measures of discipline so that decisions of old standing are not overruled for the reason merely that another view of the matter could also be taken.
 In Union of India -vs- Raghubir Singh (1989) 2 SCC in which the following elucidation can be perused:
26. It is not necessary to refer to all the cases on the point. The broad guidelines are easily deducible from what has gone before. The possibility of further defining these guiding principles can be envisaged with further juridical experience, and when common jurisprudential values linking different national systems of law may make a consensual pattern possible. But that lies in the future.
