Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.
Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.
Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.
The Constitution of India establishes an independent judiciary, with the Supreme Court as the apex authority. The judiciary is responsible for interpreting the Constitution and safeguarding the fundamental rights of citizens.
The Supreme Court and the high courts of the states have the power of judicial review, allowing them to assess the constitutionality of laws and government actions. This robust judicial framework is a cornerstone of India’s democratic system.
What are the three main objectives of Public Interest Litigation?
Public Interest Litigation commonly known as PIL is a legal remedy which allows citizens to file a case to protect and enforce the rights of public. Following are the three objectives Public Interest Litigation: To Protect Human Rights: PILs are a way to protect human rights by serving as a remedy tRead more
Public Interest Litigation commonly known as PIL is a legal remedy which allows citizens to file a case to protect and enforce the rights of public.
Following are the three objectives Public Interest Litigation:
Conclusion
Public Interest Litigations serves as a very crucial tool for the Indian Legal system. PIL serves as a remedy to citizen to file a suit against anyone in order to protect the rights of the general public.
See lessWhat are the three importances of Judicial Review?
Importance of Judicial Review Introduction Judicial Review is a fundamental principle of the constitutional framework in democracies. It empowers the judiciary to review and, if necessary, invalidate actions of the legislative and executive branches that are inconsistent with the Constitution. ThisRead more
Importance of Judicial Review
Introduction
Judicial Review is a fundamental principle of the constitutional framework in democracies. It empowers the judiciary to review and, if necessary, invalidate actions of the legislative and executive branches that are inconsistent with the Constitution. This mechanism ensures the supremacy of the Constitution and protects individual rights and freedoms.
1. Ensures Constitutional Supremacy
2. Protects Fundamental Rights
3. Maintains Balance of Power
Conclusion
Judicial Review is essential for upholding constitutional supremacy, protecting fundamental rights, and maintaining the balance of power among government branches. Recent examples from India illustrate the judiciary’s role in ensuring that laws and executive actions adhere to constitutional principles and protect individual liberties.
See lessWhat are the three main objectives of Public Interest Litigation?
Objectives of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) Introduction Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has emerged as a crucial mechanism in Indian jurisprudence for addressing societal grievances and ensuring justice for marginalized and disadvantaged groups. PILs are designed to address broader social issueRead more
Objectives of Public Interest Litigation (PIL)
Introduction
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has emerged as a crucial mechanism in Indian jurisprudence for addressing societal grievances and ensuring justice for marginalized and disadvantaged groups. PILs are designed to address broader social issues and have significantly influenced legal and social reforms in India.
1. Promote Access to Justice for the Underprivileged
2. Address Systemic and Institutional Failures
3. Advance Social Justice and Human Rights
Conclusion
Public Interest Litigation serves as a vital instrument for promoting justice, addressing systemic failures, and advancing social justice. Through recent examples, it is evident how PILs have played a significant role in addressing public grievances and enforcing rights in contemporary India.
See less"Every matter of Public Interest can not be a matter of Public Interest Litigation. "Evaluate. (200 Words) [UPPSC 2020]
Evaluation of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in India 1. Definition and Purpose of PIL: Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a legal mechanism in India allowing individuals or groups to file petitions in the court to address public interest issues. The aim is to promote justice and accountability iRead more
Evaluation of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in India
1. Definition and Purpose of PIL:
Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a legal mechanism in India allowing individuals or groups to file petitions in the court to address public interest issues. The aim is to promote justice and accountability in cases where the public’s rights are affected, especially for marginalized communities.
2. Criteria for PIL:
Not every matter can be classified as a PIL. For a case to qualify, it generally needs to meet the following criteria:
3. Recent Examples:
4. Challenges and Misuse:
5. Conclusion:
See lessPILs are a crucial tool for public justice, yet their effectiveness relies on clear criteria and judicial restraint to avoid overuse and ensure focus on genuine public concerns.
Comment on India-America "2+2 ministerial dialogue" (125 Words) [UPPSC 2020]
India-America "2+2 Ministerial Dialogue": Overview and Significance 1. Overview of the Dialogue: The "2+2 Ministerial Dialogue" between India and the United States involves meetings between Defense Ministers and Foreign Ministers of both countries. Initiated in 2018, it aims to enhance strategic cooRead more
India-America “2+2 Ministerial Dialogue”: Overview and Significance
1. Overview of the Dialogue:
The “2+2 Ministerial Dialogue” between India and the United States involves meetings between Defense Ministers and Foreign Ministers of both countries. Initiated in 2018, it aims to enhance strategic cooperation and address key issues of defense and foreign policy.
2. Significance:
3. Challenges and Criticisms:
Conclusion:
See lessThe 2+2 Ministerial Dialogue is pivotal for strengthening India-US relations and addressing mutual security concerns, though challenges in implementation and regional politics persist.
Explain the concept of Judicial Activism and evaluate its impact on the relationship of Executive and Ju- diciary in India. (125 Words) [UPPSC 2020]
Judicial Activism: Concept and Impact on Executive-Judiciary Relationship in India Concept of Judicial Activism: Judicial Activism refers to the judiciary's proactive role in addressing social injustices, safeguarding fundamental rights, and ensuring the implementation of laws beyond mere interpretaRead more
Judicial Activism: Concept and Impact on Executive-Judiciary Relationship in India
Concept of Judicial Activism:
Judicial Activism refers to the judiciary’s proactive role in addressing social injustices, safeguarding fundamental rights, and ensuring the implementation of laws beyond mere interpretation. It involves courts taking an active stance in policy issues and legislative matters.
Impact on Executive-Judiciary Relationship:
In summary, judicial activism in India has enhanced judicial authority but also created complex dynamics with the executive branch.
See lessStarting from inventing the ‘basic structure’ doctrine, the judiciary has played a highly proactive role in ensuring that India develops into a thriving democracy. In light of the statement, evaluate the role played by judicial activism in achieving the ideals of democracy. (200 words) [UPSC 2014]
Role of Judicial Activism in Achieving Democratic Ideals Introduction of 'Basic Structure' Doctrine The judiciary in India has been instrumental in shaping the democratic framework, notably through the introduction of the 'basic structure' doctrine in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973). TRead more
Role of Judicial Activism in Achieving Democratic Ideals
Introduction of ‘Basic Structure’ Doctrine The judiciary in India has been instrumental in shaping the democratic framework, notably through the introduction of the ‘basic structure’ doctrine in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973). This doctrine established that certain fundamental principles of the Constitution cannot be altered by amendments, thus preserving the core values of democracy.
Judicial Activism and Democratic Ideals Judicial activism has played a pivotal role in ensuring the protection of fundamental rights and the accountability of public institutions. For instance, the Right to Privacy was recognized as a fundamental right in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017), reinforcing personal freedoms and autonomy.
In Vineet Narain v. Union of India (1997), the Supreme Court mandated time-bound investigations in corruption cases, thus promoting transparency and curbing misuse of power.
Recent Examples of Judicial Intervention The Supreme Court’s intervention in the 2018 Sabarimala case allowed the entry of women of all ages into the temple, reflecting a commitment to gender equality and challenging regressive practices.
Conclusion Judicial activism has been crucial in advancing democratic principles by safeguarding rights, enforcing accountability, and ensuring adherence to constitutional values. While it has faced criticism for overstepping, its role in maintaining democratic integrity and addressing social injustices underscores its importance in a thriving democracy.
See lessWhether the Supreme Court Judgement (July 2018) can settle the political tussle between the Lt. Governor and elected government of Delhi? Examine. (250 words) [UPSC 2018]
Supreme Court Judgment (July 2018): Resolving the Political Tussle Between Lt. Governor and Delhi Government Background: In July 2018, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant judgment regarding the distribution of powers and functions between the Lieutenant Governor (LG) and the elected DRead more
Supreme Court Judgment (July 2018): Resolving the Political Tussle Between Lt. Governor and Delhi Government
Background:
In July 2018, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant judgment regarding the distribution of powers and functions between the Lieutenant Governor (LG) and the elected Delhi Government. This judgment came in the context of ongoing disputes over jurisdiction and administrative control between the LG and the Delhi Chief Minister, particularly in relation to executive decisions and administrative appointments.
Key Aspects of the Judgment:
Analysis of the Judgment’s Impact:
Conclusion:
The Supreme Court’s judgment in July 2018 addressed key issues regarding the division of powers between the Lieutenant Governor and the Delhi Government, providing important clarity and guidance. While it helps in delineating authority and improving governance efficiency, it may not completely resolve all political conflicts. Future disputes will likely depend on continued adherence to the judgment’s principles and the ability of both parties to work within the established framework
See lessCritically examine the Supreme Court’s judgment on the ‘National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014’ with reference to the appointment of judges of higher judiciary in India. (150 words) [UPSC 2017]
Supreme Court’s Judgment on the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014 The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act, 2014 aimed to reform the process of appointing judges to the higher judiciary by including members from the executive and legislative branches alongside the jRead more
Supreme Court’s Judgment on the National Judicial Appointments Commission Act, 2014
The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act, 2014 aimed to reform the process of appointing judges to the higher judiciary by including members from the executive and legislative branches alongside the judiciary. The NJAC proposed a commission consisting of the Prime Minister, the Chief Justice of India, and two senior judges, along with two eminent persons to ensure broader representation in judicial appointments.
Supreme Court’s Judgment: The Supreme Court struck down the NJAC Act as unconstitutional in 2015. The Court argued that the Act undermined the independence of the judiciary by allowing significant executive influence in the appointment process. It held that the NJAC’s composition threatened the separation of powers and the judicial independence enshrined in the Constitution. The Court emphasized that maintaining the Collegium System, where senior judges recommend appointments, is crucial to preserving judicial autonomy.
Critical Examination: While the NJAC aimed for transparency and inclusivity, the Court’s decision reinforced judicial independence but also left unresolved concerns about the Collegium System’s opacity and the need for reform.
See less"Constitutionally guaranteed judicial independence is a prerequisite of democracy." Comment. (150 words)[UPSC 2023]
Constitutionally guaranteed judicial independence is crucial for a functioning democracy. It ensures that the judiciary operates without undue influence from the executive or legislative branches, thereby maintaining a balance of power. This independence upholds the rule of law, as judges can make iRead more
Constitutionally guaranteed judicial independence is crucial for a functioning democracy. It ensures that the judiciary operates without undue influence from the executive or legislative branches, thereby maintaining a balance of power. This independence upholds the rule of law, as judges can make impartial decisions based on legal principles rather than political pressure. It protects the rights of individuals by providing a fair and unbiased forum for resolving disputes and holding government actions accountable. Without such guarantees, there is a risk of eroding public trust in the legal system and undermining democratic values. By safeguarding the judiciary’s autonomy, democracy is strengthened as it fosters a system where checks and balances are respected, and justice is administered equitably. Therefore, judicial independence is not merely a constitutional requirement but a foundational element that supports the integrity and stability of democratic governance.
See less