Doctrine of judicial review
The doctrine of judicial review in India refers to the power of the courts to review and, if necessary, invalidate laws or actions of the executive or legislative branches of government that are found to be unconstitutional or in violation of the fundamental rights of citizens. The doctrine of judicial review is an important aspect of the rule of law, as it ensures that the laws and actions of the government are subject to scrutiny and accountability.
The doctrine of judicial review is an inherent power of the courts in India, and is explicitly recognized in the Constitution. Article 13 of the Constitution states that any law that is inconsistent with the fundamental rights of citizens shall be void. This gives the courts the power to strike down any law that is found to be in violation of the fundamental rights of citizens.
The doctrine of judicial review is exercised by the courts in India through the process of writ jurisdiction, which allows individuals to challenge the constitutionality of laws or actions of the government. The Supreme Court of India and the high courts have the power to issue writs, such as writs of habeas corpus (to challenge unlawful detention), writs of mandamus (to direct the government to perform a public duty), and writs of prohibition (to prevent the government from exceeding its jurisdiction).
The principles of the doctrine of judicial review in India are as follows:
- The doctrine allows the courts to review and, if necessary, invalidate laws or actions of the executive or legislative branches of government that are found to be unconstitutional or in violation of the fundamental rights of citizens.
- The doctrine is an inherent power of the courts in India, and is explicitly recognized in the Constitution.
- The doctrine is exercised by the courts through the process of writ jurisdiction, which allows individuals to challenge the constitutionality of laws or actions of the government.
- The doctrine is an important aspect of the rule of law, as it ensures that the laws and actions of the government are subject to scrutiny and accountability.
- The doctrine helps to protect the fundamental rights of citizens, and to ensure that the government operates within the limits of its constitutional authority.
Landmark judgements
In the case of Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala, [1973] 4 SCC 225, the Supreme Court of India applied the doctrine of judicial review to hold that the Parliament\’s power to amend the Constitution was not unlimited, and that it could not alter the \”basic structure\” of the Constitution. This landmark judgement established the principle of the \”basic structure\” of the Constitution, which has since been used by the courts to invalidate amendments to the Constitution that are found to be in violation of the basic structure.
In the case of Maneka Gandhi v Union of India, [1978] 2 SCC 248, the Supreme Court of India applied the doctrine of judicial review to hold that the right to travel abroad is a fundamental right that is protected by the Constitution. This landmark judgement established the principle that the right to travel abroad is an aspect of the right to personal liberty, and that it cannot be infringed upon by the government except in accordance with the procedure established by law.
In the case of State of Gujarat v Mirzapur Moti Kureshi Kassab Jamat, [2005] 8 SCC 534, the Supreme Court of India applied the doctrine of judicial review to hold that a state law that sought to regulate the slaughter of cows was unconstitutional, on the grounds that it violated the right to freedom of religion.
In the case of National Legal Services Authority v Union of India, [2014] 5 SCC 438, the Supreme Court of India applied the doctrine of judicial review to hold that transgender persons have the right to self-identify their gender, and that the government is required to recognize and protect their rights as a third gender. This landmark judgement recognized the rights of transgender persons and established the principle of non-discrimination on the grounds of gender identity.
