BRICS MINISTERS OF JUSTICE MEETING ON STRENGTHENING ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION THROUGH CAPACITY BUILDING IN MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION

The power of the Judiciary to pronounce upon the constitutionality of laws and executive orders. Judicial Review in India refers to the power of the Judiciary to examine laws and executive actions to ensure they comply with the Constitution of India. This power allows the courts to strike down any law or executive order that is found to be unconstitutional, thereby upholding the supremacy of the Constitution. Judicial Review is an essential feature of the Basic Structure Doctrine, ensuring the protection of fundamental rights and the separation of powers between the legislature, executive, and judiciary. Thus, Judicial Review acts as a safeguard against unconstitutional actions and reinforces the rule of law in India.

Statement 1 is incorrect: Under Section 12 of the Gram Nyayalaya Act, 2008, Gram Nyayalayas have criminal jurisdiction, meaning they can hear and decide certain criminal cases. Additionally, under Section 13, they also have civil jurisdiction over specific types of disputes. Thus, Gram Nyayalayas exercise both civil and criminal jurisdiction, making the given statement incorrect. Statement 2 is correct: According to Section 26, Gram Nyayalayas must make efforts for conciliation and settlement of civil disputes before proceeding with formal adjudication. To implement this, Section 27 mandates that the District Court, in consultation with the District Magistrate, prepare a panel of Conciliators. These Conciliators are village-level social workers with integrity, possessing the qualifications and experience prescribed by the High Court. Their role is to assist in dispute resolution, promoting amicable settlements. Hence, the correct answer is option B.

Statement I is correct: President’s pardoning power can be subjected to limited judicial review, especially on grounds like mala fides, irrelevant considerations, or arbitrariness (as held in Kehar Singh, Epuru Sudhakar cases). Statement II is incorrect: President cannot act independently; the power must be exercised on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers under Article 74.

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.

Option A is correct. In a federal system, power is distributed between the central government and the states. There can be disputes about the division of power or interpretation of the Constitution.
An independent judiciary acts as an impartial umpire to settle these disputes and uphold the Constitution. It ensures that both the central government and the states function within their constitutional boundaries.The other options, while relevant to Indian polity, are not exclusive to federal systems Option B is incorrect. The Union Legislature having elected representatives from constituent units is a common feature in both federal and some unitary states with devolved power. Option C is incorrect. The Union Cabinet having elected representatives from regional parties is not a defining characteristic of federalism. Political party affiliation doesn't necessarily determine the federal structure. Option D is incorrect. The Fundamental Rights being enforceable by Courts of Law, while essential for a democracy, this feature exists even in some non-federal states.

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.

❌ Statement I: Incorrect
*The President of India is NOT a member of the Jury.* ✅ Statement II: Correct
*The Prime Minister of India is the Chairperson of the Jury.* ✅ Statement III: Correct
*The Chief Justice of India (or a Supreme Court Judge nominated by the CJI) is a Jury member.* ✅ Statement IV: Correct
*The Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha (or leader of largest opposition party) is a Jury member.* Correct Answer: Statements II, III, and IV 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.

A custodian is a person entrusted with the custody or care of something. - Whenever Fundamental Rights are denied or restricted, it can be challenged in the Supreme Court under Article 32; - The dispute between Centre and State can be settled in the Supreme Court under Article 131; - the Law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all the courts in India under Article 141; - For the enforcement of decrees - Article 142; - President of India consulting Supreme Court under Article 143; - After all, under Article 13, all laws that are inconsistent with or in derogation of any of the fundamental rights shall be void ( Doctrine of Judicial Review). - Supreme Court judgments are the law of the land; Based on the above facts, the Supreme Court takes care of the Constitution. So, simply the Supreme Court is the Custodian of the Constitution.

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.