Page |1

“Judicial Activism”
FINAL DRAFT

LEGAL LANGUAGE AND COMMUNICATION SKILL

SUBMITTED TO:-
DR.PRATYUSH KAUSHIK
FACULTY OF LEGAL LANGUAGE AND COMMUNICATION SKILL

Submitted By:
RAM KUMAR
ROLL NO – 1961
B.A. LLB, 1ST SEMESTER

CHANKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY,PATNA

 Page |2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to thank my faculty Dr.Pratyush Kaushik , whose assignment of such a relevant
and current topic made me work towards knowing the subject with a greater interest and
enthusiasm and moreover he guided me throughout the project.

I owe the present accomplishment of my project to my friends, who helped me immensely with
sources of research materials throughout the project and without whom I couldn’t have completed
it in the present way.

I would also like to extend my gratitude to my parents and all those unseen hands who helped me
out at every stage of my project.
 Page |3

CERTIFICATE

I, hereby, declare that the work reported in the B.A. L.L.B (Hons.) Project Report titled “Judicial
Activism ” submitted at CHANAKYA NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, PATNA carried
out under the guidance and supervision of Dr.Pratyush Kaushik and the same has not been
submitted anywhere for any purposes whatsoever.

Ram Kumar
 Page |4

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. Introduction . 6
2. Position in India. 7
3. Judicial Activism: The Constitution. 7
4. Scope of Judicial Activism In India. 8
5. Judicial Activism: Important Case Laws And Recent Examples . 8
6. Criticism of Judicial Activism. 15
7. Conclusion. 16
Bibliography 18
 Page |5

RESEARCH QUESTIONS
 What is Judicial Activism ?
 From where does the concept of Judicial Activism originated and how does it evolved in
India ?
 Why Juicial Activism is necessary in country like India ?

RESEARCH OBJECTIVE
The researcher wants to know how does the Indian Judiciary played a effective role for the
betterment of individuals through Judicial Activism and what are its flaws.

HYPOTHESIS
Indian judiciary often gets influenced by a ruling party. The A.D.M. Jabalpur case shows how
weak the court could be against the executive. Sometime government does not actively respond to
the decision of the judiciary (M.C. Mehta Case). So all these defective party should be reformed
for the better function of judicial activism in India

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This project is based upon doctrinal method of research. This project has been done
after a thorough research based upon intrinsic and extrinsic aspects of the project.

Mode of Citation:
 The researchers have followed a uniform mode of citation throughout the course of
this project.
 Page |6

INTRODUCTION
The term" judicial activism" was coined for the first time by Arthur Schlesinger Jr. in his article
"The Supreme Court:1947," published in Fortune magazine in 1947.Though the history of judicial
activism dates back to 1803 when concept of Judicial review was evolved by chief justice
Marshall in celebrated case of Marbury v/s Madison.

The emergence of judicial review gave birth to a new movement which is known as judicial
activism.

Definition
Black Law Dictionary defines judicial activism as a "philosophy of judicial decision making
whereby judges allows their personal views about public policy among other factors to guide their
decision".

Exercise of unconventional jurisprudence or creative approach of judiciary can be called as

judicial activism for a instance in India the Supreme Court has treated even a letter as a writ
petition and has passed appropriate orders. This concept has turned into a important means to
enhance the applicability of a particular legislation for social betterment and also to bring
improvement in the concerned state machinery.
We can say that judicial activism has turned a judge into a social activist, environmental activist,
political activist etc. Basic purpose is, to bring the justice to the poor people at their doorstep.
 Page |7

POSITION IN INDIA
Indian constitution itself provides scope for emergence of judicial activism by virtue of Articles
13, 32, 226, 141, 142. This term was explained and recognized by the Supreme Court in
Golaknath‟s case wherein the court laid down the judicial principle of Prospective Overruling by
giving wider beneficial interpretation of Article 13of the constitution.

In real sense the history of judicial activism in India began in late seventies when the strict rule of
locus standi was given a final rest in S.P Gupta v/union of India1, popularly known as Judges
transfer case. In this case Justice Bhagwati better known as champion of PIL, inter alia observed
“where a legal wrong or legal injury is caused or threatened to a person or determinate class of
persons and as such person or determinate class of person is by reason of poverty ,helplessness or
disability of socially or economically disadvantaged position ,unable to approach the court of
relief ;any member of public can maintain an application for an appropriate direction, order or
writ in the High Court under Art 226 and in Supreme Court under Art 32,seeking judicial redress
for the legal wrong or injury caused to such person.”

JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: THE

CONSTITUTION

Articles 13, 32, 226,141, 142 are of considerable importance in judicial activism.

Article 32 makes the Supreme Court as the protector and guarantor of the fundamental rights.

Article 13 conferred wide power of judicial review to the Apex court. In the exercise of the
judicial review it can examine the constitutionality of executive or legislative act the high courts
have also the same power in this regard.

Art 141 indicates that the power of the Supreme Court is to declare the law and not enact it, but in
the course of its function to interpret the law, it alters the law.

1
1981 supp scc 87
 Page |8

Art 142 enables the Supreme Court in exercise of its jurisdiction to pass such order or make such
order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it.

Through these Articles the supreme court as well as high courts have played a significant
role in redressal of several social issues, environmental issues etc.

SCOPE OF JUDICIAL ACTIVISM IN

INDIA

If we look at the decision given by the Supreme Court in several PIL, it is evident that most of the
PIL extends to environmental pollution, convicted prisoners and under trials, bonded labourers,
unorganized workers, pavement dwellers, personal liberty, atrocities on women and inhuman
treatment of children etc.

The court has given several important directions to the executive as well as to the legislature at
the instance of the PIL.

The Supreme Court has now realized its proper role in a welfare state and it is using this strategy
for it.

The approach of judicial activism has now come to stay as a major strategy for justice to
weaker segments of society. It is not only confined to fundamental rights but also seeks to
redress any legal wrong or injury actually caused threats.

JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: IMPORTANT

CASE LAWS AND RECENT EXAMPLES

The efforts of the Apex court in environment pollution control through PIL is indeed laudable,
particularly when the legislature is lagging behind in bridging the lacuna in the existing legal
system and administration is not well equipped to meet the challenge.
 Page |9

In M.C Mehta v/s Union of India2 the Supreme court at the instance of a PIL, directed the
company manufacturing hazardous and lethal chemicals and gases posing danger to health and
life of workmen and people living in its neighbourhood, to take all necessary safety measures
before reopening the plant.
In another case of M.C Mehta v/s UOI3 i.e. pollution of Taj Mahal, the petitioner through PIL
tried to draw the attention of the court towards the degradation of the Taj Mahal due to the
atmosphere pollution caused by a number of foundries ,chemically hazardous industries
established and functioning around the Taj Mahal .Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh better known as
green judge for his decisions on pollution ,held that the 292 polluting industries locally operating
in the area are the main source of pollution and directed them to change over within fixed time
schedule to natural gas as industrial fuel and if they could not do so they must stop functioning
beyond 31st Dec 1997 and be reallocated alternative plots in the industrial estate outside Taj
Trapezium.

In Indian council for Enviro-Legal Action v/s UOI4 the Supreme court has held that if by the
action of private corporate bodies a person‟s fundamental right is violated the court would not
accept the argument that it is not „state‟ within the meaning of Art.12 and therefore, action cannot
be taken against it. If the court finds that the Government or authorities concerned have not taken
the action required of them by law and this has resulted in violation of the right to life of the
citizens, it will be the duty of the court to intervene. In this case an environmentalist organization
filed a writ petition under Art.32 before the court complaining the plight of people living in the
vicinity of chemical industrial plants in India and requesting for appropriate remedial measures.
In people’ union for Democratic Rights v/Union of India5 i.e. Asiad case the court has held that
the state is bound to ensure the observance of the labour legislation enacted for securing the
workmen a life of human dignity and inaction on part of state in implementation of such
legislation would amount to denial of the right to live with human dignity enshrined in Art 21.
In case of Vishkha V/s state of Rajasthan6, the SC has made it clear that the sexual harassment
of working women amounts to violation of right of gender equality and right to life and personal
liberty. As a logical consequence it also amounts to the violation of right to practice any
profession, occupation or trade. The SC laid down certain guidelines to be observed at all work
place or other institutions until legislation is enacted for the purpose. These guidelines would be
treated as the law declared by SC under Art 141.

This case law provided relief to millions of working women who were compelled to remain silent
at their working place even though they face sexual comment, harassment etc. In fact this case
fills the lacuna in law to deal with this kind of problem facing by working women at their
working place.

Ban on smoking in public places:

2
1986, vol 2 scc 176
3
AIR 1997 SC 735
4
1996,3SCC,212
5
AIR1982SC 1473
6
AIR 1997 SC3011
 P a g e | 10

In a significant judgment the SC has directed all states and union territories to immediately issue
orders banning smoking in public places and public transports, including railways. The centre has
introduced an anti –smoking bill in the parliament.

In M.C Mehta v/s State of Tamil Nadu7 it has been held that the children can‟t be employed in
match factories which are directly connected with the manufacturing process as it is a hazardous
employment within the meaning of employment of children Act 1938.They can however be
employed in place of manufacture to avoid exposure to accidents. Every child must be insured for
a sum of five thousands and premium to be paid by employer as a condition of service.

In the case of National Human Rights Commission v/s State of Arunachal Pradesh8 the
Supreme Court held that every citizen or non-citizen is entitled to the right of life and personal
liberty guaranteed by Art21.

 Imposition of Patriotism in National Anthem Case9.

The Supreme Court on December 2016, passed its judgment in the case of Shyam Narayan
Chouksey v. Union of India10, which makes it mandatory, that:

1. All the cinema halls in India shall play the National Anthem before the feature film starts.
2. All present in the hall are obliged to stand up to show respect to the National Anthem.
3. The entry and exit doors shall remain closed prior to the National Anthem is played or sung in the
cinema hall so that no one can create any kind of disturbance.
4. The doors can be opened after the National Anthem is played or sung.
5. The National Flag should be displayed on the screen while the National Anthem is played in the
hall.

A case of Judicial Overreach

1. Neglected the Bijoe Emmanuel Case11 – The court in the order have not referred to the landmark
judgment in Bijoe Emmanuel case. In this case. In this case, three children were expelled from the
school in Kerala for not singing the National anthem because their religion did not permit them to
join any rituals except in their prayers to Jehovah. The court had ruled that there is no legal
provision that obliges anyone to sing the anthem and ordered the school to take back three children
it had expelled. The court has ignored the situations where the people may not be able to stand up

7
AIR1991SC 417
8
AIR 1996 SC 1234
9
Shyam Narayan Chouksey v. Union of India, 2017 SCC OnLine SC 129
10
(2018) 2 SCC 574
11
1987 AIR 748
 P a g e | 11

for physical reasons, intellectual or religious reasons because they may consciously believe that
their religious beliefs, prevent them from standing up.
2. Ignored the Uphaar Tragedy Case – In ruling that entry and exit doors be closed while playing
the National Anthem, the Supreme Court ignores its own earlier judgment in the Uphaar tragedy
case where the court had held that under no circumstances should the doors in a cinema be shut
from the outside.
3. Implementation Issues – This order will face implementation issues as who will count how many
people are standing and how many are sitting while the anthem is playing? Who will see if one
can’t stand up due to physical problems or some other reasons? And then, what if there is an
emergency? What if somebody urgently needs to go to the washroom?
4. Goes beyond the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971 – The direction goes beyond
the Prevention of Insults to National Honour Act, 1971, which says that no film, drama or show of
any sort can have the National Anthem as part of the show.

 Proactive Censorship in case of Jolly LLB 2

In this case after the certification of the movie Jolly LLB 2 by the Central Board for Film Certification
(CBFC), a petition was filed claiming that the film was in violation of Section 5B of the
Cinematograph Act, 1952, which deals with the prevention of the certification of films that involve
defamation or contempt of court. The Bombay High Court admitted the petition and appointed a
committee to report. The Court also gives Committee the power to suggest the changes. After the
recommendations by the committee, the Court ordered to cut four scenes from the movie and also
directed the CBFC to re-certify the film. The reasoning given by the Court was that this was
defamatory to the lawyer’s profession.

A case of Judicial Overreach

1. Unnecessary Interference – The Cinematograph Act, 1952 which deals with the provisions relating
to the certification of films and makes it very clear that only the Board of Film Certification has
the power to censor movies and suggests the cuts with an appeal lying to an Appellate Tribunal
and under the Act, the Government also has revisional powers. Under the Cinematograph Act, the
Courts have no power to certify, modify, or refuse certification of films.
2. Violation of Article 19(2) – The order of the court is seen as a restriction on freedom of speech and
expression as provided under Article 19(2) of the Constitution. And as it also states that only a law
can impose reasonable restrictions. It is pertinent to note that an order of a court does not come
under the law for the purposes of Part III of the Constitution which defines fundamental rights.
Thus, it can be said that the Bombay High Court’s order mandating excisions in Jolly LLB2 was
passed without any authority.
3. The committee was Illegal – The Bombay High Court’s decision to set up a committee was not
legal and without jurisdiction. The finding of contempt on the basis of trailer goes against a range
 P a g e | 12

of Supreme Court judgments that make it clear that films have to be seen as a whole. In fact, this
was the exact reason that the Delhi High Court dismissed the PIL against Jolly LLB 1. The
Committee acts as an entirely fresh censor board, and thus reduces the statutory Board itself to a
nullity.
4. Contradicting order against the Delhi High Court Judgement – In 2013 also Jolly LLB 1, ran into
legal trouble. A PIL was initiated in the Delhi High Court, asking the Court to direct the Film
Certification Board to cancel the license. The Court, in this case, dismissed the PIL, as they find
nothing of “public interest” in it, and also said that it would be premature as it had been filed
purely on the basis of trailers. A further appeal to the Supreme Court was also dismissed with
Justice Lodha memorably remarking, “if you don’t like it, don’t watch it.”

 Liquor Ban

In the Supreme Court, ruling on a PIL which was about road safety, has banned the sale of liquor
at retail outlets, as also in hotels, restaurants, and bars, that are within 500m of any national or state
highway.

A case of Judicial Overreach

1. Unnecessary Interference – The directive principles of state policy are policy issues which should
be left to the government to decide. It is not the court’s job to force the government to implement
them. These orders are felt to be against the spirit of separation of powers given by our
constitution. It was an administrative matter where the decision rests with state governments. The
court was not the appropriate authority for such decisions.
2. Not a fit case to use Article 142 – This was certainly not a fit case to invoke the extraordinary
powers of the court using Article 142, which talks about “the Supreme Court in the exercise of its
jurisdiction may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in
any cause or matter pending before it…” In the absence of any similar notification by any of the
State governments, the court extended the ban to State highways as well. It will give rise to many
problems such as how to measure 500m, how to reduce the impact and what about places like Goa,
these all matters requires executive knowledge and requires the accountability of the governments.
3. Lacked Evidence – No empirical evidence was present before the court that by banning liquor sale
on highways will reduce the deaths. It may be noted as found by the court from the statics of 2015,
that the total percentage of accidental deaths caused due to drunken driving, was only 4.2% as
against the 44.2% caused by over-speeding. So, there was no empirical reasoning behind the order.
4. Loss of Revenue – The order has caused much collateral damage for the governments. For state
governments, there is a massive loss in the form of revenue collection. According to various
estimates by the experts, suggests that state governments could lose as much as Rs 50,000 crore
per annum.The problem becomes more noticeable by the fact that at least one-half, possibly two-
thirds, of retail outlets, bars, restaurants, and hotels are located within a range of 500m of national
 P a g e | 13

or state highways. Due to this, some states have started even denotifying state highways as
municipal roads.
5. Loss of Employment – Employment and livelihoods are expected to be badly affected by the order.
The loss in business for hotels, restaurants, and bars will directly affect the jobs and indirectly will
reduce the jobs in enterprises that form part of their supply chains. The court had itself held the
right to employment as a basic right under Article 21. However, with the order of banning the sale
of alcohol along highways will make a loss of employment to lakhs of people.

 The cancellation of telecom licenses in 2G case12

After the CBI registered FIR against the officials of the Department of Telecom in 2G scam case,
the Supreme Court ordered to cancel 122 telecom licenses and spectrum allocated to eight
companies. The Supreme Court held that the process of allocation was flawed. It further directed
the government to allocate national resources through auction only.

A case of Judicial Overreach

1. Rise in Non-Performing Assets – Rising non-performing assets (NPAs) are, to some extent, the
result of the judicial decision of canceling the licenses. Courts failed to consider their impact on
the economy. Due to this the telecom sector is, till today, reeling under the after-effects of the
judgment. The balance-sheets of public sector banks are also adversely impacted as the defaults on
bank loans have increased.
2. Neglected the Role of Legislative and Executive bodies – The economic decisions of a country are
the sole domain of the legislative and executive bodies and the court, in this case, overreached
their power, which impacted the economy heavily. Banks are not willing to lend to operators
already heavily indebted and return on investment was inadequate to repay the debts.
3. Overlooked the consequences – The sector is in a debt of around Rs 5 lakh crore. Telenor, Etisalat,
and Sistema have exited. Vodafone and Idea are intended to merge. Reliance is in deep trouble and
has no choice except to exit.

 Lodha Committee report on the Board of Control for Cricket in India13

The Lodha Panel was set up by the Supreme Court, following the allegations of corruption, match-
fixing and betting scandals in Indian cricket. The committee was set up in an attempt to bring back
law and order into the BCCI and the game of cricket. The recommendations made were aimed at

12
https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/2g-spectrum-verdict-what-happens-now-to-122-cancelled-telecom-licenses-1113292-
201712-21.
13
http://www.firstpost.com/firstcricket/sports-news/bcci-vs-lodha-committee-all-you-need-to-know-about-conflict-
leading-to-scs-historic-decision-3036764.html.
 P a g e | 14

making the reforms and changing the year-old elite formation of BCCI that ruled the Indian cricket
at central and state levels.

The key recommendations of the committee are:

1. BCCI should come under RTI.

2. Cricket betting should be made legal.
3. More than two consecutive terms for holding office positions should be barred.
4. Ministers or government servants should not hold official positions in BCCI.
5. There shall be only one post per one person.
6. Only the cricket bodies that represent states should have full membership and voting rights in
BCCI.
7. Other members of the board like All India Universities, Railway Sports Promotion Board etc.
should be given the status of associate members without voting rights.

A case of Judicial overreach

1. Lodha committee had no authority – The BCCI is registered and governed by the Tamil Nadu
Societies Act. And it also does not take money from the government and was an was not controlled
by the central or any of the state government. The BCCI president, secretary, and other office-
bearers are elected on the basis of its bye-laws. So, the Lodha committee has no authority to make
the recommendations. The court could have instructed that the BCCI run in accordance with the
provisions of the Societies Act.
2. Not the Courts job to run Sports bodies – It is not for the court to run a sports body or to prescribe
how it should be run. The autonomy of the institutions should be respected. It is in the best interest
of sports that bodies that look activities in these fields are given autonomy. External interference
and violation of their autonomy are not good for the developments in these areas. If they have
violated the rules or otherwise shown themselves to be unfit for their positions, they should be
removed through the proper prescribed procedure.
3. Flawed Recommendations – With the one state one vote rule, the court has ignored the cricket
history in India going back over a century has teams participating in the Ranji Trophy from
Railways and Services. They have now been given a status of associate members with no voting
rights. Sticking to its strict provision of geographical territory criteria, teams like Bombay, Baroda,
Saurashtra, and others will now be wiped out.
 P a g e | 15

CRITICISM OF JUDICIAL ACTIVISM

The concept of judicial activism has been put under scanner by the critic since its inception. It has
been criticized on several counts. One such criticism is that the PIL strategy is a status quoits
approach of the court to avoid any change in the system and so it is a painkilling strategy which
does not treat the disease. It is argued that the problems of the poor ,disadvantaged and the
deprived cannot be solved by any trickle down method, therefore whatever the court is doing in
PIL is merely symbolic, simply to earn a legitimacy for itself which it has lost over the years.

The critics have further argued that because of judicial activism, separation of power has been
under stake. The judiciary is interfering in the field of executive and several times it has become
difficult for executive to deal with new kind of problem with new strategy as it is anticipated that
judiciary will struck down this type of strategy‟

It is further argued that by extending its jurisdiction through PIL the court is trying to bite more
than what it can chew. Lawyers have started complaining that much of the court‟s time is being
consumed by PIL and hence for the court a postcard are more important than a fifty-page
affidavit. It is further argued that at a time when the figures of pending cases before the courts are
astronomical, this new area of litigation would spell a total collapse of the judicial system in India
as it would open floodgates of litigation. However, the history of PIL in India does not support
this apprehension. Contrary to the popular belief fresh PIL filing has registered a decline in the
subsequent years.

According to one opinion, the misuse of PIL has reached ridiculous limits and petitions are being
filed all over the country before the writ courts for matters like student and teacher strike,
shortage of buses, lack of cleanliness in hospitals, irregularities in stock exchange, painting of
road signs, Dengue fever, examinations and admissions in universities and college etc. one can go
on but the list will not be exhaustive. Classical case came up when PIL petition was filed in Delhi
High Court to seek direction to the United Front Government at the centre (1997) to form a
coalition cabinet with the congress. A petition (1999) was filed for invalidating no-confidence
vote against the Vajpayee Government.
Power and publicity apart, many judges have to entertain PIL because of the liberalization of the
rule of locus standi and the concept of social justice for the poor, oppressed and exploited sections
of the society. Thus indiscriminate use of this strategy is bringing it into disrepute because it has
become the privilege of the privileged to have access to the court. In fact, majority of the petitions
either should not have been filed or should not have been entertained. PIL must be confined to
cases where justice is to be reached to that section of the society which cannot come to the court
due to socio-economic handicap or where a matter of grave public concern is involved.
 P a g e | 16

CONCLUSION

Even if all these criticism is valid no one would suggest to abolish this strategy which the courts
have innovated to reach justice to the deprived section of the society. Anything contrary would be
like suggesting the abolition of marriage in order to solve the problem of divorce. This socio-
economic movement generated by court has at least kept alive the hope of the people for justice
and thus has weaned people away from self –help or seeking redress through a private system of
justice .It is necessary for sustaining the democratic system and the establishment of a rule of law
in society. Therefore, one has to be both adventurous and cautious in this respect and the judiciary
has to keep on learning mostly by experience.

Public Interest litigation must not be allowed to degenerate into Private Publicity or Political or
Paisa Interest litigation. Finding the delicate balance between ensuring justice and maintaining
institutional legitimacy is the continuing challenge before the higher judiciary.

Needless to emphasize that the strategy of PIL must be used by the courts carefully, prudently and
with discrimination because any discriminate use of it would bring it into contempt both from the
public and the government .Therefore, the correct approach of the court in PIL cases should be a
judicious mix of restraint and activism determined by the dictates of existing realities. Any misuse
of this strategy must be strongly discouraged by the courts.

It is for this reason that the Apex court in BALCO Employees’ Union v/s Union of India14
clearly held that administrative powers cannot be challenged in PIL unless there is a violation of
Art 21 of the constitution and persons adversely affected are unable to approach the court. This
limits the power of the court and the initiative of a busybody. Furthermore the Apex court in order
to check the misuse of PIL has laid down several guidelines in case of State of Uttranchal
v/sBalwant Singh Chufal and others15 reported in (2010)3 SCC 402, which are as under:

 The courts must encourage genuine and bonafide PIL and effectively discourage and curb
PIL filed for extraneous considerations.
 Instead of every individual Judge devising his own procedure for dealing with PIL, it is
appropriate for each High Court to properly formulate rules for encouraging genuine PIL
and discouraging PIL filed with oblique motives.
 The courts should be prima facie verify the credentials of the petitioner before entertaining
a PIL.
 The court should be prima facie satisfied regarding the correctness of contents of the
petition before entertaining a PIL.

14
(2002)2SCC333
15
(2010)3 SCC 402
 P a g e | 17

 The courts should be fully satisfied that substantial public interest is involved before
entertaining the petition.

 The court should ensure that petition which involves larger public interest, gravity and
urgency must be given priority over other petitions.

 The courts before entertaining PIL should ensure that PIL is aimed at redressal of genuine
public harm or public injury. The court should also ensure that there is no personal gain,
private motive or oblique motive behind filing PIL.
 The courts should also ensure that petitions filed by busybodies for extraneous and ulterior
motives must be discouraged by imposing exemplary costs or by adopting similar novel
methods to curb frivolous petitions and petition filed for extraneous considerations.

The critics of judicial activism should remember the fact that in India until the Public Interest
Litigation was developed by the Supreme Court; justice was only a remote and even theoretical
proposition for the mass of illiterate, underprivileged and exploited persons in the country. At a
time of crucial, social and economic transformation, the judicial process has a part to play as a
midwife of change. The issue of Public Interest Litigation touches a matter of the highest
importance

literally affecting the quality of life of millions of Indians. Besides this, it will also spread wide
the canvas of judicial popular support and moral authority especially at a time when other
institutions of governance are facing a legitimate crisis.
In underlining the need for judicial activism to end class and ethnic exploitation, the International
Workshop on „Role of the Judiciary in Plural Societies‟ has echoed the emerging sentiments in
favour of PIL.The need for judicial activism was also stressed in the task of balancing interest of
ethnic groups as both the executive and the legislature would invariably reflect the aspirations of
the majority community. Judicial inaction in such circumstances could aggravate perceptions of
injustice and eventually lead to violence. It was perhaps as much recognition of these dangers as it
was a response to considerations of social justice that witnessed the growth of Public Interest
Litigation in India.

It is true that the independence of the judiciary is the first concern of the constitution but how far
a judge can go is not without limits. Court is called upon to dispense justice according to the
constitution and the law of the land .Therefore, in activity it must not forget the limits of its power
that call for self-restraint and in periods of restraint it must not be unmindful of its constitutional
duty and obligation. Fact remains that the judiciary in India has performed well, lapses
notwithstanding.
 P a g e | 18

BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS/JOURNALS
 Judicial Activism, Black‟s Law Dictionary
 Jayakumar N. K., Lectures in Jurisprudence, Butterworths.
 Dhyani S.N., Jurisprudence: Jurisprudence and Indian Legal theory
 Dhyani S. N., Fundamentals of Jurisprudence
 V.D. Mahajan, Jurisprudence and Legal theory (1996 re-print), Eastern, Lucknow

CASES
 Marbury v/s Madison
 S.P Gupta v/union of India
 M.C Mehta v/s Union of India
 Indian council for Enviro-Legal Action v/s UOI
 People’ Union for Democratic Rights v/Union of India
 Vishkha V/s state of Rajasthan
 M.C Mehta v/s State of Tamil Nadu
 National Human Rights Commission v/s State of Arunachal Pradesh
 Shyam Narayan Chouksey v. Union of India
 BALCO Employees’ Union v/s Union of India
 State of Uttranchal v/sBalwant Singh Chufal and others

WEBSITES

 https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/2g-spectrum-verdict-what-happens-now-to-122-
cancelled-telecom-licenses-1113292-201712-21.
 http://www.firstpost.com/firstcricket/sports-news/bcci-vs-lodha-committee-all-you-need-