Ans: B

Exp:

Judicial review is a fundamental principle in the Indian legal system. It empowers the judiciary, including the Supreme Court and High Courts, to examine the constitutionality of laws and government actions. If a law or government action is found to be in violation of the Indian Constitution, the judiciary can declare it null and void. In India, judicial review primarily concerns constitutional matters, but its impact can extend to other legal issues when they intersect with constitutional principles, fundamental rights, or the public interest. This mechanism ensures that government actions and laws comply with the constitutional framework and protect citizens’ rights and liberties. Judicial review allows the judiciary to review and strike down laws or government actions that are inconsistent with the Constitution.

Ans: A

Exp:

Option 1, 2, and 3 are correct: In the Indian context, the scope of judicial review encompasses the following:

• Review of Legislative Actions: The Indian Judiciary has the authority to review and scrutinise legislative actions to ensure that they are in compliance with the provisions of the Constitution. If a law passed by the legislature is found to be in violation of the Constitution, the judiciary can declare it unconstitutional and void.
• Review of Administrative Actions: The judiciary can review administrative actions taken by government authorities, agencies, or officials to ensure that they are legal, fair, and in compliance with the law. This includes actions related to government policies, regulations, and decisions that impact individuals or the public at large.
• Review of Judicial Actions: Judicial actions, including judgements and decisions made by lower courts, can be subject to review by higher courts. This allows for the correction of legal errors or misinterpretations of the law. It ensures consistency and adherence to legal principles within the judicial system.

However, it’s important to note that the Indian judiciary does not typically have a direct role in reviewing or intervening in the internal decisions of political parties (such as their candidate selection or party leadership choices) unless these decisions violate a constitutional or legal provision.

Ans: B

Exp:

Statement 1 is incorrect: Though the phrase ‘Judicial Review’ has nowhere been used in the Constitution, the provisions of several articles explicitly confer the power of judicial review on the Supreme Court and the High Courts. Example- Article 13 declares that all laws that are inconsistent with or in derogation of the Fundamental Rights shall be null and void; Article 226 empowers the High Courts to issue directions, orders or writs for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights and for any other purpose, etc.

Statement 2 is correct: The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976  is considered the most comprehensive amendment made so far to the Constitution. It is also known as “MiniConstitution’. The 42nd Amendment Act of 1976  curtailed the judicial review power of the high court. It debarred the high courts from considering the constitutional validity of any central law. However, the 43rd Amendment Act of 1977 restored the original position.

Statement 3 is correct: The Supreme Court has declared the power of judicial review as a basic feature of the Constitution or an element of the basic structure of the Constitution. Hence, the power of judicial review cannot be curtailed or excluded even by a constitutional amendment.

Ans: B

Exp:

Statement 1 is correct: The scope of judicial review in India is narrower than what exists in the USA. This is because the American Constitution provides for ‘due process of law’ against that of ‘procedure established by law’, which is contained in the Indian Constitution. Due process of law gives a  wide scope to the Supreme Court to grant protection to the rights of its citizens. It can declare laws violative of these rights void not only on substantive grounds of being unlawful but also on procedural grounds of being unreasonable.

Statement 2 is incorrect: In India, the Supreme Court examines only the substantive question, i.e., whether the law is within the powers of the authority concerned or not, while determining the constitutionality of a law. It is not expected to go into the question of its reasonableness, suitability, or policy implications. 

Ans: C

Exp:

When assessing the constitutional validity of laws added to the Ninth Schedule of the Indian Constitution, the key determinant for judicial review is the consequences and impact of the law on fundamental rights. The judiciary examines whether the law substantially abrogates or abridges fundamental rights guaranteed by Part III of the Constitution. This approach focuses on the actual impact on fundamental rights rather than the specific article being amended or the procedural method used for the amendment.