ipl-logo

Importance Of Judicial Review

1444 Words6 Pages

High Courts are the principal civil courts of original jurisdiction in the state. There shall be High Court for each state (Article 214), and every High Court shall be a court of record and shall have all the powers of such a court including the power to punish for contempt of itself (Article 215). However, Parliament may, by law, establish a common High Court for two or more states and a Union Territory (Article 231) .
Indian Judiciary with the Supreme Courts at its head and 21 High Courts in the States is arguably the most powerful judiciary in the world. The superior judiciary, by which is meant the Supreme Court and the High Courts, have jurisdiction not only to decide civil and criminal cases but by judicial review to safeguard the civil …show more content…

It tries to undo the harm that is advertently (or inadvertently) done by the actions of legislature and the executive and also tries to provide every citizen what has been promised by the Constitution under the Directive Principles of State Policy. All this is possible due to the power of judicial review. The significance of judicial review is to ensure that democracy is inclusive and that there is accountability of everyone who wields or exercises public power. Though the phrase ‘judicial review’ does not find mention in our Constitution, this power has been derived by the judiciary from various provisions. Firstly, the judicial power to interpret the constitution and especially the limits on Fundamental Rights vis-à-vis Article 13(2) suggests that any law contravening the Fundamental Rights would be declared void. It is the duty of the Supreme Court to safeguard and protect the Fundamental Rights of people and thus, it is vested with the power of judicial review under Article 32 and to interpret the Constitution. The Supreme Court’s power of judicial review extends to Constitutional Amendments also which is a contentious political …show more content…

A distorted notion of public interest litigation has resulted in this kind of overreaching. PILs, as originally conceived in 1979 by the Supreme Court, were for to protect the rights of those who had no means of access to the courts to protect them. For example, the court issued orders to prevent the exploitation of labourers on construction sites and the release of bonded labourers. The SC was on firm ground to intervene in such matters, as it had a clear mandate to protect the fundamental rights of individuals. Overall the meaning and content of human rights and personal liberty was enlarged by such orders, and the SC 's activism in such cases was lauded in India and abroad. PILs now, however, are mostly to correct government actions or omissions unrelated to protection of the fundamental rights of citizens. The court has made orders for cleanliness in housing colonies; disposal of garbage; control of traffic; control of unmanned railway crossings; control and prevention of the menace of monkeys in cities; control of breeding of animals in zoos; measures to prevent ragging in colleges; and protecting women from sexual harassment in workplaces. The court has entertained petitions in a highly technical engineering scheme for interlinking India 's rivers, and for the control of genetically modified

Show More
Related

  • Pros And Cons Of Airtastic

    2736 Words  | 11 Pages

    By taking this power away from the High Court, it may be considered unconstitutional as the protestors cannot continue with the judicial review

    Read More

  • Summary Of A Red Light For Difflaws By Frank Trippett

    477 Words  | 2 Pages

    the government’s job is to protect people’s lives and make sure that the citizens life is not in dangerous. When the government make a certain law they saw that it is more beneficial for the citizens, “the foundation of social order are profoundly shaken when ordinary law-abiding citizens take to skirting the law ”(Trippett). the law should be respected by the citizens, it is important because people deserve to live in a safe

    Read More

  • Exclusionary Rule Summary

    625 Words  | 3 Pages

    There are ninety-four district courts in the U.S., with each state having at least one. The United States Circuit Court of Appeals are appellate courts that review decisions made in the district courts. There are thirteen circuit courts located in the U.S. The highest court at the federal level is the Supreme Court, who has the final say in all decisions of law. Each state's court system varies but is usually structured into courts of limited jurisdiction and higher courts of general jurisdiction.

    Read More

  • Comparison Of Canada, The United States, And Mexico Court System

    878 Words  | 4 Pages

    At the lowest level of the state court system is the municipal court which reviews local ordinance violations such as traffic laws as well as some minor civil offenses. State Circuit Courts adjudicate in both civil and criminal court hearings, they often have special court for family and juvenile law cases. The State Court of Appeal decides matters of appeal from state court rulings. All US states have a Supreme Court to litigate further appeals for adherence to state laws.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast 1989 Texas Vs Eichman

    1518 Words  | 7 Pages

    To begin with, in the judicial system, there is an ongoing dispute over what compromises the proper amount of judicial power. This lack of agreement concerning policymaking power of the Courts is bestowed within the discussion between judicial activism and judicial restraint. In general, these two philosophies represent the conflicting approaches taken by judges in their task of interpretation. Consequently, the Court’s decision could be framed in terms of activism or restraint by either changing or upholding public policy.

    Read More

  • The Core Of The Case Against Judicial Review By Jeremy Waldron

    486 Words  | 2 Pages

    Sophie Byrne John Ward POLI 100 29 March 2023 Two Week Essay Assignment Week 10 & 11 In "The Core of the Case Against Judicial Review," published in the Yale Law Journal, Jeremy Waldron argues against the concept of judicial review, which is a concept allowing courts to strike down laws that are deemed unconstitutional. Waldron argues that this concept undermines democracy and should be replaced by a system of parliamentary sovereignty; where the legislative branch holds the power to determine the final outcome when interpreting the constitution.

    Read More

  • How Did John Adams Separate The Supreme Court

    1028 Words  | 5 Pages

    There are no power in the system provided to correct their construction, means that if the legislature passed any laws, they have the final authority of saying it is unconstitutional. In addition to, the judges have no laws by saying them doing the wrong thing of taking citizen’s rights. In my viewpoint, the federalist paper support this argument. For example,“ The judiciary...may truly be said to have neither FORCE nor WILL, but merely judgement” The legislative controls the command of the purse, and executive holds the sword of the community. Every Branch of the government should have equal responsibility of ensuring bill that passed into laws that are constitutional.

    Read More

  • Chapter 2 The Us Constitution Essay

    1195 Words  | 5 Pages

    The general authority can try all cases, These are sometimes called a court of common pleas,and a superior court or a district court depending on the state. 5.The Supreme Court shall have original and exclusive jurisdiction of all controversies between two or more States. Article:4 Relations Among States 1. Article 4 Section 2 guarantees that citizens of one state be treated equally and fairly like all citizens of another.

    Read More

  • What Is The Theme Of Judicial Tyranny The New Kings Of America

    1094 Words  | 5 Pages

    However, the new trend has been to make the document mean what you want or to just disregard it and issue new laws. The modern view is that “the Constitution is what the judges say it is (p.30)”. Sutherland throughout the book that this is assumption not correct, because if this were true, than the final authority would rest with the judges, not with the people. This line of thinking is dangerous, as it makes those tasked with interpreting the Constitution essentially able to edit it to say whatever they want, regardless of what the document actually says on a matter. With the judges making wild rulings about freedoms and laws, they are undermining and assuming the duties of Congress, something they are clearly prohibited from

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Texas High Court

    261 Words  | 2 Pages

    In Texas, there are two separate high courts: The Supreme Court of Texas and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Having two separate high courts in Texas is good because make this system more professional. However, these two high court heard different cases. The Supreme Court of Texas is the highest civil and juvenile cases, and it is the final appellate jurisdiction in Texas. In contrast, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is the highest and the final criminal court in Texas, and the jurisdiction of death penalty cases.

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Courts And California Courts

    342 Words  | 2 Pages

    According to the Superior Court of California website, there are two systems of courts in California such as federal and state. State courts divide in trial courts and appellate courts. Trial courts may also be called Superior courts, and each county has at least one trial court. Criminal cases, civil cases, appeals of small claims cases and other civil cases worth $25,000 or less are handed to trial courts. Sometimes, superior courts also handle the appeals of misdemeanor cases.

    Read More

  • The Constrained Court

    429 Words  | 2 Pages

    Lastly, courts lack the resource to implement policies in line with their decisions. Thus, even when cases are won, “court decisions are often rendered useless” as litigants are left to the task of implementation (Rosenburg 21). Despite the Constrained Courts view that courts are insufficient in producing social change, “it does not deny the possibility” (Rosenburg 21). When the right factors are in place and certain conditions in favor of the case’s outcome, courts can be a powerful institution in promoting justice (Hall 2).

    Read More

  • Three Levels Of The Federal Courts Essay

    492 Words  | 2 Pages

    The three levels within the federal courts are: the U.S. Magistrate Courts, the U.S. District Courts, the U.S. Courts of Appeals, and the U.S. Supreme Court. The magistrate courts are the lowest level and as such are limited to trying misdemeanors, setting bail amounts and assisting the district courts. The U.S. District Courts are the federal branch of original jurisdiction courts. These are responsible for criminal trials and giving guilty or not guilty verdicts. The U.S. Courts of Appeals are responsible for all the appeals from U.S. district courts.

    Read More

  • Why The Judicial Branch Is The Most Powerful

    478 Words  | 2 Pages

    Hana Kim Professor Yvonne Wollenberg Law and Politics 106 7 October 2015 Title In the United States government, there are three branches called the legislative, executive, and judicial branch. Out of these three, the judicial branch is the most powerful. The judicial branch is made up of the Supreme Court, the court with the most power in the country, and other federal courts that are lower in the system; the purpose of this branch is to look over laws and make sure they are constitutional and reasonable.

    Read More

  • Role Of Judiciary In Malaysia

    1103 Words  | 5 Pages

    The hierarchy of courts of Malaysia begins with the Magistrates’ Court, followed by the Sessions Court, High Court, Court of Appeal and finally is the Federal Court of Malaysia. There are generally two types of trials, criminal and civil. The jurisdiction of the courts in civil or criminal matters are contained in the Subordinate Courts Act 1948 and the Courts of Judicature Act 1964. Article 121 of the Constitution provides for two High Courts of co-ordinate jurisdiction, the High Court in Malaya, and the High Court in Sabah and Sarawak. Thus this creates two separate local jurisdiction of the courts – for Peninsular Malaysia and for East Malaysia.

    Read More

More about Importance Of Judicial Review

Open Document