Answer:

Judicial review in India is the power of the judiciary to examine the constitutionality of laws and executive actions. It derives its authority from Article 13, Article 32, and Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This doctrine ensures that no law or government action can violate fundamental rights or the basic structure of the Constitution, thereby safeguarding the rights and liberties of the citizens.

Enroll now for UPSC Online Course

The Concept of Judicial Review

• Constitutional Safeguard: Judicial review acts as a constitutional safeguard, ensuring that legislative and executive actions comply with the Constitution. It prevents arbitrary use of power and preserves the democratic fabric of the nation.
  For example: In the Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973), the Supreme Court established the doctrine of the basic structure, ensuring judicial review over constitutional amendments.
• Protection of Fundamental Rights: Judicial review empowers the courts to protect citizens’ fundamental rights by invalidating any law or government action that infringes upon these rights.
  For example: In the Maneka Gandhi Case (1978), the Supreme Court expanded the interpretation of Article 21, ensuring judicial scrutiny over laws affecting personal liberty.
• Scope under Article 13: Article 13 explicitly provides for judicial review by stating that any law inconsistent with fundamental rights shall be void. This provision empowers the judiciary to annul unconstitutional laws.
  For example: In the I.R. Coelho Case (2007), the Supreme Court ruled that even laws placed in the Ninth Schedule are subject to judicial review if they violate the basic structure.
• Check on Executive Power: Judicial review ensures that the executive does not exceed its constitutional powers, acting as a crucial check on executive overreach.
  For example: In the ADM Jabalpur Case (1976), the judiciary’s stance during the Emergency highlighted the need for stronger judicial review mechanisms to check executive actions.
• Review of Delegated Legislation: The judiciary has the power to scrutinise delegated legislation, ensuring that subordinate laws created by the executive do not go beyond the scope of the authority granted by Parliament.
  For example: The Supreme Court struck down provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) in 2003, declaring some provisions unconstitutional under judicial review.

Significance of Judicial Review in Indian Context

• Preservation of the Basic Structure: Judicial review is essential for safeguarding the basic structure of the Constitution, ensuring that Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution does not undermine fundamental principles.
  For example: In the Minerva Mills Case (1980), the Supreme Court reiterated the basic structure doctrine, striking down amendments that threatened judicial independence.
• Safeguarding Fundamental Rights: Judicial review plays a critical role in ensuring that laws and policies do not violate citizens’ fundamental rights, especially in the face of arbitrary state actions.
  For example: In the Navtej Singh Johar Case (2018), the Supreme Court invalidated Section 377, protecting the rights of the LGBTQ+ community.
• Protection of Federalism: Judicial review upholds the federal structure by resolving conflicts between the Union and State governments, ensuring that both act within their constitutional boundaries.
  For example: The Supreme Court intervened in the S.R. Bommai Case (1994) to limit the misuse of Article 356(President’s Rule), preserving federal principles.
• Ensuring Accountability: Judicial review ensures that government bodies remain accountable for their actions, promoting transparency in governance and preventing abuse of power.
  For example: The Supreme Court’s judgement in the Vineet Narain Case (1997) established guidelines for transparency in the investigation of corruption cases, holding the executive accountable.
• Strengthening the Rule of Law: Judicial review is fundamental to maintaining the rule of law, ensuring that the government acts according to established legal principles and does not operate outside the law.

Impact of Judicial Review on the Relationship Between the Judiciary and the Legislature

• Judicial Independence vs. Parliamentary Sovereignty: Judicial review has sometimes led to friction between the judiciary’s role in reviewing laws and Parliament’s law-making powers, raising questions about judicial activism.
  For example: The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Case (2015) resulted in the judiciary striking down a constitutional amendment passed by Parliament, leading to tensions.
• Judicial Activism and Judicial Overreach: The increasing use of judicial review has sparked debates on judicial overreach, where the judiciary is perceived to encroach upon legislative functions.
  For example: In the 2G Spectrum Case (2012), the Supreme Court’s cancellation of licences raised concerns about judicial intervention in policy decisions typically handled by the executive.
• Legislative Reactions to Judicial Review: Parliament has occasionally reacted to judicial review by passing amendments to nullify court decisions, leading to a dynamic of checks and balances.
  For example: The Ninth Schedule was created to protect certain laws from judicial scrutiny, but the Supreme Court’s ruling in I.R. Coelho Case (2007) reinstated judicial review over those laws.
• Ensuring Legislative Accountability: Judicial review acts as a check on Parliament, ensuring that it remains within its constitutional boundaries. This has strengthened legislative accountability and upheld constitutional values.
  For example: The Supreme Court’s ruling in the Kesavananda Bharati Case (1973) limited Parliament’s power to alter the basic structure, ensuring accountability in constitutional amendments.
• Promoting Constitutional Dialogue: Judicial review fosters a dialogue between the judiciary and the legislature, encouraging Parliament to enact laws that comply with constitutional norms, fostering democratic governance.
  For example: The Right to Information Act (2005) was passed after multiple Supreme Court judgments highlighted the need for transparency in public administration.

Check Out UPSC CSE Books From PW Store

Judicial review is a cornerstone of India’s democratic framework, safeguarding fundamental rights and maintaining the basic structure of the Constitution. It balances the power of the legislature and executive, ensuring accountability while promoting the rule of law. Despite occasional tensions between the judiciary and Parliament, judicial review strengthens India’s constitutional democracy by upholding its core principles and protecting citizens’ rights.

DOWNLOAD PDF