Answer:

Introduction:

The doctrine of proportionality is a fundamental principle in the realm of judicial review, serving as a critical tool for courts to assess the balance and reasonableness of administrative actions and decisions in relation to their objectives. This doctrine ensures that a public authority’s measures do not infringe upon individuals’ rights more than necessary, maintaining a delicate balance between achieving public interest goals and upholding individual rights.

Body:

The Essence of Proportionality

• Definition and Development: 
  • Originating from European administrative law, the doctrine has evolved to ensure that administrative actions are not only legal but also reasonable and justified within a democratic context. 
  • It underwent significant development in England, with landmark cases expanding judicial review grounds to include ‘illegality,’ ‘irrationality,’ and ‘procedural impropriety,’ and emphasizing proportionality​​.
• Four-Stage Test: 
  • The test involves assessing whether the action pursued a legitimate aim, whether the means were suitable, if a less restrictive alternative was available, and whether the measure was overall justified in a democratic society. 
  • This framework ensures a thorough examination of the decision’s impact on democratic rights​​.

Application in Indian Jurisprudence

• Constitutional Basis: 
  • In India, the doctrine is anchored in Article 14 of the Constitution, emphasizing equality before the law and the prevention of arbitrary state action. 
  • The Supreme Court has applied this principle to scrutinize the reasonableness and non-arbitrariness of administrative actions, ensuring they have a reasonable nexus with their objectives​​​​.
• Supreme Court Cases: 
  • Various Supreme Court cases illustrate the application of the doctrine, ensuring that administrative punishments and actions are proportionate to the misconduct or objective. 
  • These cases demonstrate the Court’s role in preventing excessive or unjustified infringements on rights and freedoms by administrative bodies​​.

Proportionality and the Electoral Bond Scheme

• While the direct impact of the doctrine on the Electoral Bond Scheme’s judicial review is not detailed in the provided sources, the principle typically requires examining whether a government scheme’s objectives justify its impacts on fundamental freedoms and transparency. 
• In such a context, the doctrine would guide the assessment of whether the scheme’s aims, such as cleaner political funding, were achieved through the least restrictive means and without unduly infringing on democratic principles.

Conclusion:

The doctrine of proportionality is a vital aspect of judicial review, acting as a safeguard against excessive or arbitrary state action. It ensures that administrative measures are balanced, reasonable, and justifiable, upholding the fundamental rights and democratic values enshrined in the constitution. Through its application in landmark cases, including the scrutiny of significant schemes like the Electoral Bond Scheme, the doctrine underscores the judiciary’s role in maintaining the rule of law and democratic governance.