Overview: Judicial review in India ensures that the actions of the legislature and executive conform to the Constitution. Under Article 13, the judiciary has the power to invalidate laws that violate Fundamental Rights. This mechanism not only safeguards citizens’ rights but also upholds the basic principles enshrined in the Constitution.
Key Theories and Concepts:
- Judicial Review: A process through which courts examine the constitutionality of laws and government actions. It is derived from the basic structure doctrine, which was established in the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973). This case restricted Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution, ensuring that certain principles, like judicial review, remain inviolable.
- Doctrine of Basic Structure: This doctrine emerged from Kesavananda Bharati, protecting the core values of the Constitution from arbitrary changes. It ensures that features like the rule of law, separation of powers, and judicial review are protected
Landmark Cases:
- Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): Established that Parliament cannot amend the “basic structure” of the Constitution. Judicial review is a key element of this structure.
- Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980): Reaffirmed the basic structure doctrine and emphasized judicial review as an essential part of the Constitution. It protected citizens from legislative overreach and upheld the balance of power.
- Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): Expanded the scope of Article 21, holding that any law affecting personal liberty must be just, fair, and reasonable. This case broadened the reach of judicial review by ensuring that laws related to personal liberty are subject to strict scrutiny.
- Vineet Narain v. Union of India (1998): Highlighted the judiciary’s role in ensuring transparency in governance. The Court’s oversight of investigations into corruption ensured that the government was held accountable.
- I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007): Reinforced the idea that laws placed in the Ninth Schedule could still be subject to judicial review if they violated the basic structure of the Constitution, thus preventing misuse of legislative power.
- Shayara Bano v. Union of India (2017): Demonstrated the role of judicial review in protecting fundamental rights. The Court struck down the practice of triple talaq, deeming it unconstitutional and violative of the right to equality and personal liberty.
- Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018): The decriminalization of homosexuality showcased how judicial review can advance societal values, protecting rights under the umbrella of privacy, dignity, and equality
Prominent constitutional provisions that provide for the doctrine of judicial review are as follows:
->Article 13 declares that all laws that are inconsistent with or in derogation of the Fundamental Rights shall be null and void.
Article 32 guarantees the right to move the Supreme Court for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights and empowers the Supreme Court to issue writs for that purpose.
->Article 131 provides for the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in center–state and inter-state disputes.
->Article 132 provides for the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in constitutional cases.
->Article 133 provides for the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in civil cases.
->Article 134 provides for the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in criminal cases.
->Article 134A deals with the certificate for appeal to the Supreme Court from the High Courts.
->Article 135 empowers the Supreme Court to exercise the jurisdiction and powers of the Federal Court under any constitutional law.
->Article 136 authorizes the Supreme Court to grant special leave to appeal from any court or tribunal (except military tribunal and court-martial).
->Article 143 authorizes the President to seek the opinion of the Supreme Court on any question of law or fact and on any pre-constitution legal matters.
->Article 226 empowers the High Courts to issue directions, orders, or writs for the enforcement of the Fundamental Rights and for any other purpose.
->Article 227 vests in the High Courts the power of superintendence over all courts and tribunals within their respective territorial jurisdictions (except military courts or tribunals).
->Article 245 deals with the territorial extent of laws made by Parliament and by the Legislatures of States.
->Article 246 deals with the subject matter of laws made by Parliament and by the Legislatures of States (Le., Union List, State List, and Concurrent List).
->Articles 251 and 254 provide that in case of a conflict between the central law and state law, the central law prevails over the state law and the state law shall be void.
->Article 372 deals with the continuance in force of the pre-constitution laws.
Reflection Point:
- How does judicial review help maintain the balance of power between the executive, legislature, and judiciary in India? Reflect on how landmark cases like Kesavananda Bharati and Maneka Gandhi have shaped the legal landscape in India.
