18 December 2024 : Daily Answer Writing

Q1) While the judiciary has played an active role in protecting the rights of citizens and ensuring social freedoms, it has often come at a cost of an unhealthy asymmetry among institutions in the country. Examine and give suitable examples.

(150 Words/10 Marks)

ANS:
Indian judiciary has played a pivotal role in protecting the rights of citizens and
ensuring social freedoms through various landmark judgments and has often
stepped in to fill the gaps left by the legislative and executive branches. The
Judiciary does this through three main instruments – judicial Review, PILs and
constitutional interpretations.
Role of judiciary in protecting the rights of citizens and ensuring social
freedoms:
1. Protection from arbitrary action by the State: (a) expanding the scope of ‘life
and personal liberty’ from mere ‘animal existence’ to life with dignity [Maneka
Gandhi case]; (b) ensuring rights of undertrials [Hussainara Khatoon case]; (c)
providing reliefs in cases of illegal detentions or excessive use of force by the
police; (d) rationalized interpretation of draconian laws [e.g., Sedition law]
2. Expanding the scope of individual rights: (a) progressive interpretation of
Article 21 [e.g. Right to Privacy in Justice Puttaswamy case]; (b) include a range of
rights such as the right to a clean environment, right to health, right to education
etc.
3. Liberal/progressive interpretation of rights: (a) protecting interests of minority
groups and ensuring right to dignifies living [e.g., decriminalizing homosexuality in
Navtej Singh Johar case]; (b) adjudicate in favor of progressive and new social
reforms. [E.g., Women entry into temples and mosques]

4. Filling legislative and executive voids: (a) protect the rights and dignity of
women [e.g., Triple talaq case; Vishakha guidelines]; (b) ensuring free and fair
election process [e.g., Lily Thomas case]

However, Judicial overreach has led to unhealthy asymmetry:
1. Judicial activism many times results into judicial overreach: (a) judge end up
making laws or modify the existing laws [Judicial legislation]; (b) issue executive
order in the name of complete justice [Article 142], thus infringing on the
authority of the executive branch.
2. Tyranny of the unelected: (a) Unlike the executive of the legislature, the
judiciary is not accountable for any of its actions; (b) does not enjoy the popular
mandate; (c) lacks the policy vision as in the case of an elected government.
3. Violates the doctrine of separation of power as mandated by the constitution
[Article 50]; results in judicial adventurism.
4. Judiciary often lacks expertise/experience in specialty domains, such
judgements may end up unintended outcomes. [e.g., ban on liquor sale within
500 m of highways].
5. Due to an increase in the number of PILs being entertained by the judiciary, it
proactively plays the role of an activist, creating an unhealthy asymmetry.