JUDICIAL ACTIVISM IN INDIA

JUDICIAL ACTIVISM IN INDIA

·         Judicial activism means that instead of judicial restraint, the Supreme Court and other lower courts become activists and compel the authority to act and sometimes also direct the government and government policies and also administration.

·         It is a way through which justice is provided to the disadvantaged and aggrieve citizens. Judicial activism refers to the interference of the judiciary in the legislative and executive fields. It mainly occurs due to the non­activity of the other organs of the government. In recent years, as the incumbents of Parliament have become less representative of the will of the people, there has been a growing sense of public frustration with the democratic process. That is why the Supreme Court had to expand its jurisdiction by, at times, issuing novel directions to the executive.

·          Failure on part of the legislative and executive wings of the Government to provide ‘good governance’ makes judicial activism an imperative. Delivering justice to a population of over a billion does not sound like and never will be an easy task. It however becomes increasingly difficult in a country like India. Judicial activism has arisen mainly due to the failure of the executive and legislatures to act.

·         Secondly, it has arisen also due to the fact that there is a doubt that the legislature and executive have failed to deliver the goods.

·         Thirdly, it occurs because the entire system has been plagued by ineffectiveness and inactiveness. The violation of basic human rights has also led to judicial activism.

·         Finally, due to the misuse and abuse of some of the provisions of the Constitution, judicial activism has gained significance.

Some other situations that lead to judicial activism are follows: When the legislature fails to discharge its responsibilities.

·         In case of a hung parliament where the government is very weak and instable.

·          When the governments fail to protect the basic rights of the citizens or provide an honest, efficient and just system of law and administration,

·         When the party in power misuses the courts of law for ulterior motives as was done during the Emergency period, and

·          Finally, the court may on its own try to expand its jurisdiction and confer on themselves more functions and powers.

·         Judicial activism is the practice going beyond the normal law for the jury. There are some very important cases where judicial activism plays an important role like Bhopal gas tragedy and the Jessica Lal Murder case are among the top two.

·          Money and muscle power tried to win over the good. But lately, it was with the help of judicial activism that the case came to at least one decision.

·         The Judiciary cannot take over the functions of the Executive. The Courts themselves must display prudence and moderation and be conscious of the need for comity of instrumentalities as basic to good governance. Judicial activism has to be welcomed and its implications assimilated in letter and spirit. An activist Court is surely far more effective than a legal positivist conservative Court to protect the society against legislative adventurism and executive tyranny. When our chosen representatives have failed to give us a welfare state, Judiciary plays an active role. In judicial activism, the judge places his final decision with his heart and mind, which is emotionally handled.