Judicial Activism

Published on 16 Jan 2025

Judicial Activism

Judicial activism refers to the idea that judges should actively interpret and shape the law rather than simply applying it as it is written. This involves interpreting the law in a way that can expand or limit certain rights or that resolves legal disputes in ways that are not explicitly provided for by the law. 

Significance of Judicial Activism

• Protection of Fundamental Rights: Judicial activism has often been used to protect and expand the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution.

• Example: In the Maneka Gandhi case (1978), the Supreme Court ruled that the executive action of seizing a passport violated the liberty of the person under Article 21.

• Fill legislative/executive vacuum: The lack of action on the part of the legislature or executive sometimes demands immediate actions from the judiciary.

• Example: In the Vishaka vs State of Rajasthan case (1997), the Supreme Court issued guidelines for the prevention of sexual harassment in the workplace in the absence of any specific legislation.

• Serve social justice: The judiciary steps up to protect the rights of socially vulnerable groups and secure justice for them.

• Example: In Olga Tellis case 1985, the Supreme Court ruled that forceful eviction of pavement dwellers is a violation of their right to livelihood.

• Environment protection: The judiciary has understood the importance of protecting the environment and has actively been involved in protecting the same over the years.

• Example: In the Taj Trapezium case (1986), the Supreme Court ruled the 292 industries in the Taj Mahal Trapezium zone to operate using safe fuels like propane instead of coke.

• Faster delivery of justice: The dignity of the individual needs to be protected promptly to uphold the public trust in the judiciary.

• Example: In Hussainara Khatoon vs State of Bihar case 1979, the court looked into the inhuman conditions of prisoners and undertrials and established the right to speedy justice as a basic fundamental right.

• Uphold constitutional morality: The cardinal principles of the constitution need to be secured which demands the judiciary to be more active.

• Example: In the Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India case, 2018, Section 377 was decriminalized to uphold constitutional morality.

Thus, judicial activism has been quite useful in protecting rights and facilitating the timely delivery of justice. But when the rate of activity exceeds a threshold, it can result in various issues leading to judicial overreach.

Tags:
Polity

Keywords:
Judicial Activism Indian Judiciary separation of power

Syllabus:
General Studies Paper 2

Topics:
Functions of Judiciary