Describe about the power of Judicial Review in India. (HPAS Mains Question Paper 2022 – GS 2, Q.1)
In India, the power of Judicial Review refers to the Indian judiciary’s ability to review and invalidate laws, regulations, and executive actions found to be unconstitutional or violate fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution. The power of judicial review is an essential aspect of the separation of powers in the Indian Constitution, which ensures that no branch of government has unchecked power.
Articles 13 and 32 of the Indian Constitution grant the power of Judicial Review. Article 13 establishes the doctrine of judicial review by declaring that any law that violates fundamental rights is unconstitutional. Article 32 guarantees the right to petition the Supreme Court to protect fundamental rights. The Indian judiciary has used this judicial review power to overturn laws that violate fundamental rights such as the right to life, equality, freedom of speech and expression, and others.
The Indian judiciary has the power of judicial review at all levels, from the High Courts to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court, in particular, has the authority to declare any law unconstitutional and null and void. Judicial review is not limited to constitutional issues; it can also be used in civil and criminal cases.
The power of judicial review is a significant check on the legislative and executive branches’ powers. It ensures that laws and regulations follow the Constitution and citizens’ fundamental rights. The power of judicial review is a critical component of India’s democratic system, which upholds the rule of law and protects citizens’ rights.
Overall, the power of Judicial Review is a vital aspect of the Indian Constitution, ensuring that the government operates within the limits of the Constitution, protects individual rights and liberties, and upholds the rule of law.
- Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala: In this landmark case, the Supreme Court of India used the power of Judicial Review to declare that the Parliament’s authority to amend the Constitution was not unlimited and that it could not alter the basic structure of the Constitution.
- Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India: In this case, the Supreme Court struck down a provision of the Passports Act that allowed the government to impound passports without giving reasons. The Court held that the right to travel abroad was a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution and could not be taken arbitrarily.
- S.R. Bommai v. Union of India: In this case, the Supreme Court declared that the President’s power to dismiss state governments under Article 356 of the Constitution was subject to judicial review. The Court held that the President’s decision could be struck down if it was based on irrelevant or extraneous considerations.
- Indian Medical Association v. V.P. Shantha: In this case, the Supreme Court struck down a provision of the Consumer Protection Act that allowed the government to nominate non-judicial members to the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. The Court held that the provision violated the doctrine of separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary.
- ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla: In this case, the Supreme Court held that the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution could be suspended during a state of emergency. However, this decision was later overruled by the Supreme Court in the case of Minerva Mills v. Union of India, which held that the right to life and personal liberty could not be suspended even during a state of emergency.
