useful for competitive examination and general studies/knowledge.

1. JUDICIAL ACTIVISM BY
JUDICIARY IN INDIA.
PAPER – III, GS-II/IV
CONSTITUTION AND LAW
By Mohd Abdul Muheeb.

2. Agenda for Today?
 Constitutional provisions regarding the judiciary
in India.
 A comparison…
 Understanding the Judicial activism with the
help of case laws and verdicts.
 Advantages-Disadvantages-necessity.
 Understanding the Judicial restraint and why it is
important.
 Judicial accountability.
 Judicial pronouncements which can be
considered as Judicial activism.

3. Subjective questions
 Can Judicial activism plays a key role in
keeping a check on the powers of the
Parliament and Executive? Critically examine.
 How can the courts in India practice Judicial
restraint in order to prevent judicial activism.
 Suggest some of the measures how to tackle
Judicial Activism in constructive manner.

4. Basic MCQs
 Public Interest Litigation in India is linked
with
 Judicial Review - Judicial Activism
 Judicial intervention - Judicial Sanctity.
 Judicial Process in India is based on
 Due Process of Law - Convention
 Procedure established by law - Constitution.

5. Constitutional provisions
regarding Judiciary in India.
 Article 13 : Power of Judicial review.
 Article 124-127 :Talks about the provisions
regarding Union Judiciary as per India
Constitution.
 The term ‘Judicial Activism’ is no where
mentioned in the constitution. Hence it is an
extra-constitutional term.

6. Judiciary
 The Indian Judiciary is the common man’s last
hope for justice and also the last line of
defence against arbitrary action of either
government or private person.
 It is led by Supreme Court of India, followed
by the High Courts and sub-ordinate courts.

7. Role of Judiciary in India
 Upholding the Law and Enforcing
Fundamental Rights.
 Judicial Review.
 Dispute Resolution.

8. Judicial Independence
 It is to insulate the judiciary from any external pressure from
other organs of the government.
 It is to make judiciary free from political biases, political and
moral beliefs, and partisan ideologies.
 Judges are bound to maintain primary fidelity to the law and the
constitution.
 Law and adjudication must remain autonomous from partisan
politics.
 Financial independence is a crucial part of Judicial independence.

9. A Comparison
American Judiciary Indian Judiciary
 It is a separated Judicial
System
 The power and jurisdiction of
the Supreme Court is limited
to that prescribed in the
Constitution
 Defends rights of citizens
according to ‘due process of
law’.
 Scope of Judicial review is
very wide
 It is an Integrated Judicial
system.
 The Parliament may
increase the powers and
jurisdiction of the SC.
 Defends rights of citizens
according to ‘procedure
established by law’.
 Scope of Judicial review is
very limited.

10. A Comparison……
American Judiciary Indian Judiciary
 Has no advisory jurisdiction
 Has no plenary powers to
grant special leave to appeal.
 Confined to Constitutional
cases only.
 Jurisdiction extends to naval,
maritime activities, etc.
 Has advisory Jurisdiction.
 Has wide discretion to grant
special leave to appeal.
 Covers Constitutional, Civil
and Criminal matters.
 Confined to federal matters
only.

12. Judicial Activism
 Judicial activism refers to the use of judicial power to articulate
and enforce what is beneficial for the society in general and
people at large.
 It leads to Judicial legislation and give themselves the right to
strike down any legislation or rule against the precedents if it
goes against the Constitution.
 Example such as striking down of National JudicialAccountability
Act, Golaknath case, Kesavananda Bharati case.
 Reasons for Public support :
 If administration has become apathetic and non-performing.
 If there is no remedy, except to move courts through PIL, enlarging the
field of Judicial intervention.

13. Why Judicial Activism is
needed?
 When the legislature fails to make the
necessary legislation.
 When the government agencies fails
miserably to perform their administrative
functions.
 When people lose faith in the elected officials
and looks upon judiciary for relief.

14. Why Judicial Activism is not
good?
 It is fabricated solely by the judiciary.
 It is not backed by the Constitution and it is through suo-motu action, not
mentioned in the constitution.
 It results in the collapse of principle of separation of power when it tries to fill up
the vacuum created by other organs of the government.
 Extensive use of judicial powers in the administrative field may well, in the long
run, blunt the judicial powers themselves.
 The Court should be to compel the authorities to act to pass appropriate
executive orders rather than substitute judicial orders for administrative ones.
 It results in the inefficient use of limited judicial resources and also the dead-lock
between executive and judiciary.

15. Pros and Cons of Judicial
activism
Pros cons
 It sets out a system of
balances and controls the
other branches of the
government.
 It allows judges to use their
personal judgment.
 It prevents misuse of
power and helps to keep
trust placed in the justice
system.
 It limits the functioning of the
government.
 It violates the limit of power
set to be exercised by the
constitution when it overrides
any existing law.
 It can harm the public at large
as the judgment can be
influenced by personal or
selfish motives.
 Repeated interventions can
diminish the faith of people in
govt.

17. Solution to Judicial
Activism
 Judicial Restraint.
 It lets judges look at the original intent of the
writers of the constitution.
 It promotes the changing the laws by means of
constitutional amendments and not by judicial
pronouncements and guidelines.

18. Judicial Accountability
 In India, judges are accountable only to themselves.
 Accountability to oneself, which is a very weak form
of constraint.
 A strong, ethical, legal culture needs to be practiced,
which plays a critical role in establishing judicial
accountability.
 The Legal culture must be created and nurtured by
judges, lawyers, legal academicians, the media and
the citizenry.

19. When did Judicial activism
start in India?
 Judicial activism started in India in 1980s where
there was rapid expansion of Judicial power.
 It allowed ‘Public Interest litigation’ by relaxing
the principle of ‘locus standi’.
 By the 1990s and 2000s, the courts began to
engage in a host of administrative activities.
 The constitutional court began to perform as
‘Administrative’ Court.

20. Initial examples of Judicial
activism
 The mandatory playing of NationalAnthem in Cinema
theatres, before screening of movies.
 Ban on non-green fireworks in National Capital Region by
Supreme Court in ‘Arjun GopalVs Union of India case’.
 Ban on sale of BS-IV vehicle after March, 2020 and roll out
of BS-VI vehicles.
 Amending of the Scheduled Caste andTribes (prevention of
Atrocities)Act, 1989 by Supreme Court in Subhash
Kashinath vs State of Maharastra case.

21. Judicial activism ……
 Supreme Court in Rajesh Sharma vs State of Uttar Pradesh
case, felt that 498A of IPC being misused and issued
guidelines to curb it.
 Observations made by the Judges, in controversial cases
such as NRC, etc.
 Declaring some rivers as ‘Living beings’ and should be
accorded with ‘Fundamental rights’.
 Hence, these were some of the cases which gives enough
evidence that from time to time, the Judiciary has tried to
enter the Legislative and Executive domain.

22. Some latest Judicial
Pronouncements

23. Supreme Court of India
 Pandemic is spreading like a wild fire.Take
strict action against those violating guidelines
:whoever he may be”; make treatments
affordable : Supreme Court.
 18-12-2020
 Financial disability of parents/guardians
should not hinder education of children
restored from Child care Institutions;
Supreme Court issues directions.

24. Supreme Court pronouncements
 Financial losses cannot be offset on the weary
shoulders of the laboring worker”; Supreme
Court quashes Gujarat Notification
permitting factories to extend work hours
and cut overtime.
 Dated : 01.10.2020

25. Bombay High Court
 Instead of People chasing vaccine, you should
chase people: Bombay High Court seeks
NEGVAC Policy on Door-to-Door vaccination.
 CovidVaccination – Ensure that Elderly Citizens
are not made to stand in queues, Give online
registrants preference over walk-ins.
 “Medical Education Policy has to be Re-looked,
High time for Policy makers and Government to
apply their mind.”
 20-05-2021

26. Bombay High Court
 If there is single death due to lack of oxygen,
officers responsible will be personally liable :
Bombay High Court Aurangabad Bench.
 Rashtriya Shramik Aghadi v.The State of
Maharashtra and others
 Principle of “No-work, No-wage” not applicable in
present extraordinary situations.
 Bombay High Court – 12.05.2020

27. Karnataka High Court
 ‘Don’t give false hope to people that they’ll
getVaccine’. Karnataka HC Directs State to
inform steps taken to procure second doses.
 Come up with rational policy to prioritize
second dose of Covid-19 vaccine.

28. Himachal Pradesh High Court
 War against the Covid is not to be fought by
the Government alone; Private hospitals
should not shrink from their duties and
responsibilities.
 Dt. 06.05.2021

29. Delhi High Court
 Delhi High Court issues Contempt notice to Center
for non-supply of Oxygen to NCT of Delhi.
 Dt. 04-05-2021
 Wastage of a single dose of vaccine is a criminal
waste.
 20-04-2021
 Vehicle even if occupied by only one person would
constitute a ‘public place’ and wearing of mask
therein would be compulsory.
 07-04-2021

30. Delhi High Court
 Anil K Aggarwal and AnrV. UoI and Ors.
 Hyper-legalistic interpretation of the various
clauses in the Guidelines issued by the Central
Govt. over the Covid-19 crisis, would be
fundamentally misconceived.
 Dated : 01.05.2020
 Amit BhargavaV.The State (NCT OF Delhi)
 Quarantine Period cannot be strictly restricted to
14 days.
 Delhi High Court – Dt. 11.0532020

31. Tripura High Court
 Court takes suo motu action, asks State to
provide detailed data to tackle with second
wave of Covid 19.
 Dt. 10-05-2021

32. Allahabad High Court
 EC, govt. failed to foresee ‘disastrous’ impact
of polls, says Allahabad HC.
 UP govt. ill-prepared to deal with spread of
infections in rural areas, says Allahabad HC.
 Allahabad High Court seeks UP govt.
response on charges of Covid
mismanagement.

33. Allahabad High Court
 ‘Criminal act, no less than genocide’ : Allahabad
HC on deaths due to non-supply of oxygen.
 Provide compensation to polling officials died
due to covid.
 Allahabad HC appoints nodal officers in every
district of UP to keep an eye on Covid situation.
 Allahabad HC orders lockdown in 5 Uttar
Pradesh cities.

34. Uttarakhand High Court
 Japinder SinghV. Union of India
 Private Unaided Schools cannot collect tuition
fees if the student is not attending online classes.
 12.05.2020

35. Andhra Pradesh High Court
 K. Ramakrishna s/o K Rangaiah v.The Union
of India and others.
 It is the duty of the State to ensure that safe travel
and accommodation facilities are made available
to the migrant workers.
 15.05.2020

36. Constructive suggestions to
tackle Judicial Activism
 The people of India, representatives shall engage in healthy
debate addressing the Judicial activism in our country.
 The Courts should be vary of their Constitutional
responsibility and refrain from performing as
Administrative courts.
 The courts needs to strike equilibrium in exercise of their
judicial powers without judicial over-reach.
 The courts shall remember that they act as final forum for
those wronged by administrative excesses and executive
arbitrariness.

37. Thank you!!!!!!!!!!