Judicial review ( Important for APSC)

In India, the concept of judicial review represents a cornerstone of the nation’s legal and political landscape. This crucial authority empowers the Judiciary to meticulously review and assess the constitutionality of acts, orders, or decisions issued by the Legislative and Executive branches of government. Whenever a citizen or entity questions the constitutionality of a governmental action, the Judiciary, through the process of judicial review, serves as the final arbiter in determining the validity of such actions.

The source of authority for judicial review in India is firmly rooted in the country’s Constitution. Several key articles within the Constitution expressly grant this power to the Judiciary. These articles include Article 13, which prohibits the enactment of laws that infringe upon fundamental rights, Article 32, providing individuals with the right to approach the Supreme Court for the enforcement of their fundamental rights, Article 136, which confers discretionary powers upon the Supreme Court to entertain and decide upon various appeals, Article 142, which empowers the Supreme Court to pass any order deemed necessary for the delivery of justice, and Article 147, governing the conduct of the Government of India.

The primary functions of judicial review are manifold and play a pivotal role in India’s democratic framework. Firstly, it acts as a safeguard to ensure that all governmental actions adhere to the Constitution. Secondly, it provides a shield for the fundamental rights of Indian citizens, offering legal recourse in case these rights are violated or curtailed. Additionally, judicial review serves as a critical check on the exercise of power by the government, thereby preventing potential abuses or excesses. By enforcing the principle that no one, including the government, is above the law, judicial review upholds the rule of law in India.

The scope and impact of judicial review in India are far-reaching. This constitutional practice ensures that the nation’s citizens are protected against any potential overreach by the government, thereby promoting transparency, accountability, and adherence to the fundamental principles enshrined in the Constitution. In essence, the power of judicial review plays a vital role in maintaining the delicate balance of powers and upholding the integrity of India’s constitutional framework. It is a fundamental pillar of the country’s democratic governance and the protection of individual rights.

Judicial Review

In India, judicial review is a fundamental doctrine through which the actions of the executive and legislative branches are subject to scrutiny by the judiciary. Despite the principle of separation of powers among the executive, legislative, and judicial arms of the State, the judiciary is vested with the authority to review and assess the actions of the other two branches.

•  The “Indira Gandhi vs. Raj Narain Case” established judicial review’s significance as part of India’s constitutional structure.
• Judicial review empowers the courts to evaluate government actions for constitutional compliance.
•  It limits the legislature’s authority, allowing laws to be invalidated if they conflict with the Constitution.
• Judicial review is associated with interpretational and observer roles of the judiciary.
• India’s adoption of judicial review was influenced by the American Constitution.
•  “Suo Moto” cases and “Public Interest Litigation (PIL)” have expanded the judiciary’s role, allowing intervention in public issues without a formal complaint.

Constitutional Provisions for Judicial Review

• -Although the Indian Constitution does not expressly grant courts the authority to invalidate laws, it imposes specific limitations on each branch, and transgressions render laws void.
• The role of the court is to determine whether any constitutional limitations have been exceeded.
• Several constitutional provisions support the process of judicial review:

•  Article 372(1) establishes judicial review of pre-constitution legislation.
•  Article 13 declares any law conflicting with Fundamental Rights as void.
• Articles 32 and 226 designate the Supreme and High Courts as protectors and guarantors of fundamental rights.
• Articles 251 and 254 address inconsistencies between union and state laws, rendering state laws void in such cases.
•  Article 246(3) grants exclusive powers to state legislatures for matters in the State List.
• Article 245 subjects the powers of both Parliament and State legislatures to the Constitution’s provisions.
•  Articles 131-136 empower the courts to adjudicate disputes among individuals, individuals and the state, and between states and the union. The Supreme Court’s interpretations become binding law for all courts.
• Article 137 provides the Supreme Court with the special power to review its judgments and orders, primarily in cases of apparent errors in criminal proceedings.

Judicial Review Classification

Reviews of Legislative Actions

 In this category, the judiciary ensures that laws enacted by the legislature adhere to the constitutional provisions.

Review of Administrative Actions

This category involves the enforcement of constitutional discipline over administrative agencies, overseeing their exercise of authority.

Review of Judicial Decisions

Examples of this category include cases like Golaknath, bank nationalization, Minerva Mills, and privy purse abolition. Here, the judiciary reviews its own previous decisions and interpretations.

Significance of Judicial Review

Upholding Constitutional Supremacy

 Judicial review is crucial for preserving the paramountcy of the Constitution.

Preventing Executive Tyranny

It serves as a safeguard against potential abuses of power by the executive branch.

Preserving Federal Balance

Judicial review plays a vital role in maintaining the equilibrium within a federal system.

Check on Legislative and Executive Power

 It is essential for curbing the potential misuse of authority by both the legislature and the executive.

Ensuring Judicial Independence

Judicial review contributes to upholding the independence of the judiciary, a cornerstone of democracy.

Protecting People’s Rights

It acts as a shield for the rights and liberties of the populace, ensuring their preservation.

Examples of Judicial Review

• Section 66(A) of the IT Act (2015)

   – In 2015, the Supreme Court nullified Section 66(A) of the amended Information Technology Act, 2000. This provision governed the punishment for sending “offensive” messages via electronic devices. Violation could result in imprisonment for up to three years and fines. The Supreme Court deemed this section unconstitutional, citing that it infringed upon the freedom of speech protected under Article 19(2) of the Constitution.

• Golaknath Case (1967)

   – The Golaknath Case raised questions about the amendability of Fundamental Rights. The Supreme Court held that Fundamental Rights are not subject to parliamentary alterations as per Article 13. Amending Fundamental Rights would require a new Constituent Assembly. Additionally, it clarified that Article 368 provides the procedure for amending the Constitution but does not grant Parliament the authority to alter Fundamental Rights. This case is sometimes considered an example of Judicial Activism.

Limitations of Judicial Review

– Judicial review has inherent constraints:

   – It focuses on reviewing the correctness of procedures rather than the decisions themselves.

   – Judicial opinions set standards for future cases.

   – Judicial review is reserved for higher courts, such as the Supreme Court and High Courts.

   – Excessive judicial interventions can erode public trust in government’s efficiency and integrity.

   – The judiciary cannot interfere in political and policy matters unless absolutely necessary.

   – Judicial review can potentially be influenced by personal or selfish motives, thereby affecting the public negatively.

   – It can overstep the constitutionally prescribed limits of power by overriding existing laws.

   – India follows a separation of functions rather than a strict separation of powers.

   – The concept of separation of powers is not strictly adhered to in judicial review. Instead, a system of checks and balances is in place to empower the judiciary to strike down unconstitutional laws passed by the legislature.

With the power of judicial review, the courts fulfill a crucial role as custodians of fundamental rights, ensuring that the bedrock of democracy remains firmly intact. In an era of expanding state functions, the need for judicial intervention in the decision-making and execution processes of the government has grown substantially. However, there exists a fine line between judicial activism and overreach. When the judiciary exceeds its prescribed powers in the name of activism, it risks undermining the very concept of the separation of powers that the Constitution so meticulously delineates.

In essence, the formulation of laws is the primary function of the legislature, while the executive bears the responsibility of implementing and enforcing these laws effectively. This leaves the judiciary with the pivotal task of interpretation. Maintaining a harmonious equilibrium among these government branches is imperative to uphold and sustain the cherished values and principles enshrined in the Constitution. It is a delicate balance that must be preserved to ensure the continued flourishing of India’s democratic fabric.