Analysis of Judicial Review Power of the Supreme Court of India

The power of judicial review is one of the most significant aspects of the judicial system of any democracy. In India, the concept of judicial review plays a pivotal role in upholding the Constitution and safeguarding the fundamental rights of individuals. The Supreme Court of India, through its powers of judicial review, ensures that laws, executive actions, and legislative enactments are in consonance with the Constitution. This blog aims to explore the power of judicial review conferred upon the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution.

Understanding Article 32 of the Indian Constitution

Article 32 of the Indian Constitution is often referred to as the “Heart and Soul” of the Constitution. Dr. B.R. Ambedkar, the principal architect of the Constitution, described it as the most important article because it guarantees the protection of fundamental rights. It states:

“The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred by this Part is guaranteed.”

In simpler terms, Article 32 gives individuals the right to directly approach the Supreme Court of India for the enforcement of their fundamental rights. This article serves as a direct mechanism for the protection of the Constitution and provides an accessible remedy to those whose fundamental rights are violated.

Judicial Review: Definition and Scope

Judicial review refers to the power of the judiciary to examine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions. It ensures that all laws, orders, and actions comply with the Constitution. Judicial review is a key function of the Supreme Court of India under Article 32, where it has the authority to strike down unconstitutional laws or executive decisions. This power is crucial for maintaining the rule of law and ensuring that no authority exceeds its constitutional limits.

The scope of judicial review is vast and covers:

1. Legislative Review: The Supreme Court can examine the validity of laws passed by the Parliament or state legislatures. If a law is found to be inconsistent with the Constitution, the court can declare it invalid.
2. Executive Review: The Supreme Court can also review the actions of the executive branch, including administrative decisions, orders, and policies. If such actions violate the Constitution or infringe upon fundamental rights, they can be struck down.
3. Fundamental Rights Protection: Judicial review under Article 32 is most often invoked to protect fundamental rights, which are enshrined in Part III of the Constitution. The Supreme Court ensures that no law or executive action violates these rights, and individuals can directly approach the Court for relief.

Case Law: Landmark Judgments on Judicial Review

Several landmark judgments have solidified the role of judicial review in India:

1. Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): This case is a significant ruling where the Supreme Court held that the basic structure of the Constitution cannot be amended by Parliament. It expanded the concept of judicial review to include the protection of the Constitution’s basic structure.
2. Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980): This judgment reaffirmed the power of judicial review and established that judicial review is an essential feature of the Constitution. It held that any law inconsistent with the Constitution’s basic structure could be struck down.
3. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): The Supreme Court expanded the scope of Article 21, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. In this case, the Court interpreted Article 21 to include the right to travel abroad and struck down a law that violated this right, showcasing the power of judicial review in protecting fundamental rights.

Limitations of Judicial Review

While the power of judicial review is vast, it is not absolute. There are certain limitations:

1. Doctrine of Separation of Powers: The judiciary does not have the power to interfere with the legislative and executive functions unless they are clearly unconstitutional. The Court must respect the separation of powers between the three branches of government.
2. Judicial Restraint: The Supreme Court often exercises judicial restraint, especially in matters where the issue involves the policy decisions of the legislature or executive. The Court generally refrains from interfering in matters that require specialized knowledge and discretion, such as economic and social policies.
3. Constitutional Amendments: The Court cannot review constitutional amendments unless they violate the basic structure of the Constitution. This was clearly stated in the Keshavananda Bharati case.

Conclusion

The power of judicial review vested in the Supreme Court under Article 32 is a cornerstone of Indian democracy. It ensures that the Constitution remains supreme and that the rights of individuals are safeguarded. Through judicial review, the Supreme Court acts as the guardian of the Constitution, upholding the rule of law and ensuring that no law or executive action contravenes the fundamental principles laid out in the Constitution. While there are limitations to judicial review, its importance in maintaining the integrity of the democratic system cannot be overstated.

The role of judicial review in India is not just about striking down unconstitutional laws but also about interpreting the Constitution to reflect the changing needs and values of society. Through this power, the Supreme Court of India ensures that justice is not only done but is seen to be done, strengthening the faith of citizens in the legal system.

Also Read

BBA LLB vs BA LLB
BBA LLB Degree Course
Career Options after Law Degree in India

From
Sweksha Bhadauria
School of Law
Lingaya’s Vidyapeeth
Law University in Delhi NCR