Judicial Review in India
Indian Polity & Governance
- PYQs8
- Articles1
Background
Judicial review is a cornerstone of the Indian democratic system, ensuring checks and balances, upholding the supremacy of the Constitution, and protecting citizens' rights. Its application in cases of executive overreach and misuse of power is highly relevant for governance and polity.
Judicial review is the power of the judiciary to examine the constitutionality and legality of legislative enactments and executive orders of both the Central and State governments. If a law or order is found to be in violation of the Constitution, it can be declared null and void by the Supreme Court or High Courts.
Facts & tables
- Constitutional Basis
- Though not explicitly mentioned, it is implicitly derived from Articles 13, 32, 226, 227, and 136 of the Constitution.
- Scope
- Extends to both legislative and executive actions, ensuring they conform to the Constitution and statutory provisions.
- Basic Structure Doctrine
- Judicial review is considered a part of the 'Basic Structure' of the Constitution, meaning it cannot be abrogated even by a constitutional amendment.
- Guardian of Rights
- It acts as a guardian of Fundamental Rights, protecting citizens from arbitrary state action and executive overreach.
| Type | Reference |
|---|---|
| Conceptual area | Constitutional Law |
| Conceptual area | Separation of Powers |
| Body | Role |
|---|---|
| Supreme Court of India | Exercises judicial review |
| High Courts | Exercises judicial review |
Prelims angle
Prelims angle: Statement-based questions
Prelims angle: Conceptual understanding
- Judiciary's power to review laws/orders.
- Ensures constitutionality and legality.
- Derived from Articles 13, 32, 226, etc.
- Part of the Basic Structure Doctrine.
- Protects Fundamental Rights from state overreach.
| Year | Framing tags |
|---|---|
| 2024 | Definition-based questions, Institutional roles and functions |
| 2022 | Statement-based questions, Factual recall |
| 2021 | Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding |
| 2021 | Conceptual understanding, Multi-statement analysis |
| 2020 | Multi-statement analysis, Conceptual understanding |
| 2019 | Multi-statement analysis, Conceptual understanding |
| 2019 | Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding |
| 2014 | Factual recall, Conceptual understanding |
Timeline
-
Constitutional Law
Conceptual area
-
Separation of Powers
Conceptual area
-
Prelims 2014
Factual recall, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2019
Multi-statement analysis, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2019
Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2020
Multi-statement analysis, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2021
Statement-based questions, Conceptual understanding
-
Prelims 2021
Conceptual understanding, Multi-statement analysis
-
Prelims 2022
Statement-based questions, Factual recall
-
Prelims 2024
Definition-based questions, Institutional roles and functions
-
Madras High Court censures former Chennai Police Commissioner Arun for invoking Goondas Act
The judiciary's power to scrutinize executive and legislative actions for constitutionality and legality, acting as a vital check on state power and protector of fundamental rights, forming part of the Basic Structure.
See also
No related topics linked yet.
Past papers
2014–2024 · 8 questions
In the news
Madras High Court censures former Chennai Police Commissioner Arun for invoking Goondas Act
The judiciary's power to scrutinize executive and legislative actions for constitutionality and legality, acting as a vital check on state power and protector of fundamental rights, forming part of the Basic Structure.
Try these PYQs
With reference to Indian Judiciary, consider the following statements:
1. Any retired judge of the Supreme Court of India can be called back to sit and act as a Supreme Court judge by the Chief Justice of India with prior permission of the President of India.
2. A High Court in India has the power to review its own judgement as the Supreme Court does.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Statement 1 is correct: Under Article 128, the Chief Justice of India may, at any time, with the previous consent of the President, request a retired Judge of the Supreme Court or a retired Judge of a High Court (who is duly qualified) to sit and act as a Judge of the Supreme Court. Statement 2 is not correct: Although there is no explicit Article in the Constitution equivalent to Article 137 (which grants review power to the SC) for High Courts, the High Courts are "Courts of Record" under Article 215. As a Court of Record, a High Court has the inherent power to review its own orders and judgments to correct any patent error or prevent a miscarriage of justice. This has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in various rulings.
Consider the following statements :
1. Pursuant to the report of H.N. Sanyal Committee, the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was passed.
2. The Constitution of India empowers the Supreme Court and the High Courts to punish for contempt of themselves.
3. The Constitution of India defines Civil Contempt and Criminal Contempt.
4. In India, the Parliament is vested with the powers to make laws on Contempt of Court.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Statement 1 is correct: The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 was enacted based on the recommendations of the H.N. Sanyal Committee, which examined the law relating to contempt of courts. Statement 2 is correct: Articles 129 and 215 of the Constitution empower the Supreme Court and High Courts, respectively, to punish for contempt of themselves. Statement 3 is incorrect: The Constitution does not define civil contempt and criminal contempt; these are defined under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. Statement 4 is correct: Parliament has the power to make laws on contempt of court, as evidenced by the enactment of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
Consider the following statements:
1. The Constitution of India defines its ‘basic structure’ in terms of federalism, secularism, fundamental rights and democracy.
2. The Constitution of India provides for ‘judicial review’ to safeguard the citizens’ liberties and to preserve the ideals on which the Constitution is based.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Statement 1 is incorrect: The term "basic structure" is not explicitly mentioned in the Indian Constitution. It was first propounded by the Supreme Court in the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973). The Court ruled that while Parliament has the power to amend the Constitution under Article 368, there are certain features of the Constitution that form its basic structure and cannot be altered or destroyed through amendments by Parliament. Although the basic structure doctrine includes elements such as federalism, secularism, democracy, and fundamental rights, these features are not explicitly listed as the 'basic structure' in the Constitution itself. Statement 2 is incorrect: The Constitution of India does not explicitly mention the power of judicial review. Instead, this power is derived from various provisions, particularly Articles 13, 32, 131-136, 143, 226, and 246. Judicial review allows the Supreme Court and High Courts to examine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions, ensuring they do not violate fundamental rights or other constitutional provisions. This power is essential in maintaining the supremacy of the Constitution and protecting citizens' rights. Hence, neither of the statements is correct.
With reference to the Constitution of India, consider the following statements:
1. No High Court shall have the jurisdiction to declare any central law to be constitutionally invalid.
2. An amendment to the Constitution of India cannot be called into question by the Supreme Court of India.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Statement 1 is incorrect. High Courts have the power to declare central laws unconstitutional. This power is derived from their inherent jurisdiction to uphold the Constitution. Statement 2 is incorrect. While the Supreme Court cannot question the amending power of the Parliament, it can review the constitutional validity of an amendment. The landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala established the doctrine of the 'basic structure' of the Constitution. Any amendment that violates this basic structure can be declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.
Consider the following statements :
1. The 44th Amendment to the Constitution of India introduced an Article placing the election of the Prime Minister beyond judicial review.
2. The Supreme Court of India struck down the 99th Amendment to the Constitution of India as being violative of the independence of the judiciary.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct ?
Statement 1 is Incorrect: The 44th Amendment actually aimed to reverse the provision introduced by the 39th Amendment, which had placed the elections of the President, Vice President, Prime Minister, and Speaker of the Lok Sabha beyond judicial review. The 44th Amendment restored the power of judicial review for these elections. Statement 2 is Correct: The Supreme Court of India struck down the 99th Constitutional Amendment Act, 2014, in 2015 in the case of Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India. This amendment sought to replace the Collegium system with the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) for appointing judges to the Supreme Court and High Courts. The Court held that the NJAC undermined judicial independence, a part of the basic structure doctrine, and was therefore unconstitutional.
Show 3 more PYQs
We adopted parliamentary democracy based on the British model, but how does our model differ from that model?
1. As regards legislation, the British Parliament is supreme or sovereign but in India, the power of the Parliament to legislate is limited.
2. In India, matters related to the constitutionality of the Amendment of an Act of the Parliament are referred to the Constitution Bench by the Supreme Court
Select the correct answer using the codes given below.
Statement 1 is Correct: The key difference lies in Parliamentary Supremacy. In the British model, Parliament is considered sovereign. This means its legislative powers are supreme, and its laws cannot be challenged by any other body. In India, the Constitution is supreme. Parliament's power to legislate is limited by the Constitution. The judiciary can review laws passed by Parliament and strike them down if they violate the Constitution. Statement 2 is also Correct: This is a specific example of the limitation on Parliament's power in India. The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has the authority to review amendments made to existing laws (Acts) and determine if they are constitutional. This power of judicial review ensures the Constitution remains the supreme law.
The power of the Supreme Court of India to decide disputes between the Centre and the States falls under its
Article 131 of the Constitution of India provides for the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to settle the disputes between the different units of the Indian Federation such as between the Centre and one or more states and, between the states.
A Writ of Prohibition is an order issued by the Supreme Court or High Courts to :
Writ of Prohibition: * It is a judicial order issued by a higher court (Supreme Court or High Court) to a lower court or tribunal. * It prevents the lower court from exceeding its jurisdiction or acting contrary to law. * Purpose: To stop ongoing proceedings in a case where the lower court lacks jurisdiction or violates legal procedures. * Nature: It is preventive, ensuring the lower court does not act unlawfully rather than correcting a wrong decision after it has occurred. * Example: If a tribunal starts hearing a case that legally falls under the jurisdiction of a civil court, the Writ of Prohibition can halt such proceedings. * Comparison with Certiorari: Prohibition is issued before judgment to stop proceedings, whereas Certiorari is issued after judgment to quash orders passed unlawfully.