Distinguish between Judicial Review and Judicial Activism and also cite the important decisions of the…

Question

Distinguish between Judicial Review and Judicial Activism and also cite the important decisions of the Supreme Court on the two subjects.

Ghissu Editorial · Accepted Answer

Judicial review is the constitutional power to invalidate laws and actions that violate the Constitution, while judicial activism is the proactive use of interpretation and PILs to expand rights and fill policy gaps. Kesavananda Bharati (1973) and the NJAC case (2015) illustrate review, and Vishaka (1997) and Puttaswamy (2017) activism.

**Introduction**

Judicial review and judicial activism have evolved as crucial tools for safeguarding the Constitution and citizens’ rights, with the Supreme Court⟦2⟧⟦1⟧ playing a pivotal role through landmark rulings that uphold constitutional governance and address social realities.

**Defining and Distinguishing**

SKETCH: comparison | Judicial Review vs Judicial Activism  
a: Judicial Review  
b: Judicial Activism  
- Constitutional mandate :: Judicial philosophy  
- Validates or invalidates laws :: Shapes policies and rights  
- Reactive role :: Proactive role  
- Limited to legal scrutiny :: Expands scope of justice

1. **Judicial Review**: Courts examine laws and executive actions for constitutional compliance, invalidating those that violate constitutional provisions, as in Kesavananda Bharati (1973), which established the basic structure doctrine limiting Parliament’s power.  
2. **Judicial Activism**: Courts proactively shape policies and expand rights, using tools like Public Interest Litigations (PILs) and broad interpretations of fundamental rights, exemplified by Vishaka (1997) which addressed workplace harassment, and Navtej Singh Johar (2018) decriminalizing homosexuality.

**Scope and Significance**

3. **Judicial Review’s Role**: It protects fundamental rights and federalism, seen in S.R. Bommai (1994) which curtailed misuse of Article 356, and NJAC (2015) where the Supreme Court struck down the National Judicial Appointments Commission to safeguard judicial independence.  
4. **Judicial Activism’s Impact**: Expanded rights under Article 21, including privacy in K.S. Puttaswamy (2017), addressed social issues through PILs tackling corruption and environmental concerns, and filled policy gaps like in the Singur Land Acquisition case (2016), where land was returned to farmers to protect agrarian interests.

**Important Judgments**

5. **Key Decisions**: Kesavananda Bharati (1973), S.R. Bommai (1994), NJAC (2015), K.S. Puttaswamy (2017), and Navtej Singh Johar (2018) illustrate the scope and balance of judicial review and activism in India’s constitutional framework.

**Conclusion**

These doctrines ensure constitutional morality and social justice by balancing judicial restraint with proactive intervention, thereby strengthening democracy and protecting citizens’ rights in India.

Model answer

ఈ ప్రశ్నను ప్రాక్టీస్ చేయండి

భారతదేశంలో న్యాయవ్యవస్థ15 questions

Ghissu