Judicial Review

Introduction

Judicial review represents a vital element of the Constitution of India, empowering the judiciary to assess and interpret statutes, guaranteeing their conformity with the Constitution. This mechanism functions as a system of checks and balances on the legislative and executive branches, protecting citizen rights and upholding the rule of law.

Table of Contents

1. What is Judicial Review?
2. Historical Context of Judicial Review in India
3. Constitutional Provisions for Judicial Review
4. Scope and Significance of Judicial Review
5. Major Landmark Judgments of the Supreme Court
6. The Process of Judicial Review
7. Criticisms of Judicial Review
8. Judicial Review in Comparative Perspective
9. Conclusion
10. FAQs

1. What is Judicial Review?

• Definition: Judicial review encompasses the authority of courts to evaluate whether a statute, policy, or executive decision is unconstitutional. This authority ensures the Constitution’s primacy.
• Objective: The main purpose of judicial review is to safeguard fundamental rights and uphold the Constitution, hindering arbitrary legislative or executive actions.

2. Historical Context of Judicial Review in India

• Post-Independence Development: The roots of judicial review in India can be traced back to the British legal framework. Nonetheless, it received formal establishment after independence in 1947.
• Influences: Various legal systems, particularly the American model, have shaped India’s stance on judicial review, especially concerning the fundamental rights enshrined by the Constitution.

3. Constitutional Provisions for Judicial Review

• Article 13: Declares that any law violating fundamental rights shall be deemed null and void.
• Article 32 & 226: Allow individuals the right to assert their fundamental rights through the Supreme Court and High Courts.
• Article 142: Grants the Supreme Court the authority to issue any order essential for delivering complete justice.

4. Scope and Significance of Judicial Review

• Protection of Fundamental Rights: Judicial review acts as a protective barrier for citizens against oppressive legislation.
• Maintenance of the Rule of Law: It upholds the Constitution’s superiority and guarantees that all government actions are lawful.
• Promotes Accountability: The possibility of judicial intervention forces the legislative and executive branches to act with responsibility and transparency.

5. Major Landmark Judgments of the Supreme Court

• Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): Established the “basic structure” doctrine, affirming that certain elements of the Constitution cannot be modified or nullified.
• Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980): Reinforced the basic structure doctrine and highlighted the equilibrium between Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles.
• Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): Broadened the interpretation of Article 21, asserting the right to life and personal liberty.

6. The Process of Judicial Review

• Types of Cases: Judicial review generally involves cases challenging the constitutionality of statutes.
• Initial Petition: A public interest litigation (PIL) can be initiated by any individual or group in the Supreme Court or High Court.
• Judicial Procedure: Courts hold hearings, scrutinize constitutional provisions, and render decisions based on legal analysis.

7. Criticisms of Judicial Review

• Judicial Activism vs. Judicial Overreach: Critics contend that the judiciary at times oversteps its authority, impacting the separation of powers.
• Delay in Justice: The prolonged process of judicial review can sometimes hinder timely delivery of justice to citizens.
• Potential Bias: Some argue that judicial rulings may be swayed by the personal convictions of judges.

8. Judicial Review in Comparative Perspective

• United States: Judicial review was established in Marbury v. Madison (1803), primarily to ensure checks on legislative authority.
• Germany: The Federal Constitutional Court plays a crucial role in evaluating laws against the Basic Law (Grundgesetz).
• UK: Unlike India, the UK does not have a formal judicial review system but depends on Parliamentary sovereignty, although courts can review adherence to EU law.

9. Conclusion

Judicial review continues to be a cornerstone of Indian democracy, balancing individual rights with state authority. The judiciary’s capacity to nullify unconstitutional statutes has been vital in maintaining democracy and protecting the Constitution. Despite facing criticisms, it remains essential for fostering a just and fair society.

FAQs

1. What does judicial review mean in India?

• Judicial review in India enables courts to scrutinize the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions to safeguard citizens’ rights and uphold the Constitution.

2. What is the significance of judicial review?

• Judicial review is vital for protecting fundamental rights, sustaining the rule of law, and ensuring accountability within the political framework.

3. Which articles of the Indian Constitution deal with judicial review?

• Articles 13, 32, 226, and 142 are crucial in defining the judicial review authorities in India.

4. Can individuals challenge laws through judicial review?

• Yes, individuals have the capacity to challenge laws by submitting a public interest litigation (PIL) in the Supreme Court and High Courts.

5. What is the ‘basic structure’ doctrine?

• The ‘basic structure’ doctrine prohibits any amendments that alter the essential framework of the Constitution, as determined in the Kesavananda Bharati case.

6. Are there criticisms regarding judicial review?

• Yes, criticisms include concerns over judicial activism, delays in justice, and potential biases in judicial outcomes.

7. How does judicial review differ from judicial activism?

• Judicial review is a constitutional process to evaluate the legality of laws, while judicial activism involves proactive judicial interventions in policy issues.

8. What landmark case expanded the interpretation of Article 21?

• The Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) case significantly broadened the interpretation of the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.

9. How has judicial review evolved in India?

• Judicial review in India has evolved through significant rulings that have delineated its scope and limitations, adapting to the shifting dynamics of society.

10. Which other countries practice judicial review?

• Numerous countries, like the United States, Germany, and Canada, possess their own frameworks for judicial review to ensure the constitutionality of laws.

This thorough analysis of judicial review in India emphasizes its essential role in preserving democratic principles and safeguarding citizens’ rights. Understanding its historical context, constitutional foundations, and landmark cases enables individuals to recognize the judiciary’s crucial role in the Indian legal system.