Judicial review under the Indian Constitution refers to the power of the judiciary to examine the constitutionality of legislative enactments and executive orders. It is a key feature of the Indian legal system that upholds the supremacy of the Constitution and ensures that all laws and actions by the government conform to constitutional principles.
This power is primarily derived from Articles 13, 32, 131-136, 143, 226, and 246 of the Constitution. Article 13 declares that any law inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights shall be void. This provides the foundation for judicial review in India.
The Supreme Court and High Courts are the primary authorities responsible for conducting judicial review. They have the power to strike down any law or executive action that violates the Constitution. This ensures a system of checks and balances and protects citizens against arbitrary use of power by the state.
One of the landmark cases in this area is Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), where the Supreme Court established the “Basic Structure Doctrine.” According to this doctrine, Parliament cannot amend the Constitution in a way that alters its basic structure, including features like the rule of law, separation of powers, and fundamental rights.
Judicial review acts as a guardian of the Constitution, but it also faces criticism. Critics argue that excessive judicial activism can lead to judicial overreach, where courts may interfere with legislative or executive functions. However, the judiciary maintains that its role is to protect the Constitution and the rights of citizens.
In conclusion, judicial review is a vital tool in Indian democracy. It reinforces the rule of law, upholds constitutional values, and provides a mechanism to challenge the misuse of power, thus strengthening the framework of governance in India.
Thanks for reading! If you'd like to share your thoughts or get in touch, visit my Contact page.
