Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 19

JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

JUDICIAL PROCESS

ON

JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

SUBMITTED TO:

Dr. (ASSISTANT PROFESSOR)

SUBMITTED BY:

AHMAD FUAD FAIZI

L.L.M(EX.), SEMESTER- II

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

Acknowldgement

I would like to express my special thanks of gratitude to my Supervisor Dr.


,Assisstant Professor ,Jamia Millia Islamia,New Delhi, who gave me the golden opportunity to
do this wonderful project on the topic:- “JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND
IMPLICATIONS” which also helped me in doing a lot of Research and i came to know about so
many new things I am really thankful to them. Secondly i would also like to thank the librarian
and friends who helped me a lot in finalizing this project within the limited time frame.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

S. No. Page No.

1. Introduction…………………………………………………….
2. In Black's Law Dictionary……………………………………..
3. According To Jurists…………………………………………..
4. Present Scenario ………………………………………………
5. In The Constitution……………………………………………
6. Court View In Case Laws……………………………………..
7. Reasons…………………………………………………………
8. Implications……………………………………………………
9. Conclusion
10.Bibliography

Judicial Activism: Meaning and implications

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

Introduction

The judicial activism is use of judicial power to articulate and enforce what is beneficial for the
society in general and people at large. Supreme Court despite its constitutional limitation has
come up with flying colors as a champion of justice in the true sense of the word. JUSTICE…
this seven letter word is one of the most debated ones in the entire English dictionary. With the
entire world population being linked to it, there is no doubt about the fact that with changing
tongues the definition does change. The judicial activism has touched almost every aspect of life
in India to do positive justice and in the process has gone beyond, what is prescribed by law or
written in black and white 1. Only thing the judiciary must keep in mind is that while going
overboard to do justice to common man must not overstep the limitations prescribed by
sacrosanct i.e. The Constitution.

Judicial activism describes judicial rulings suspected of being based on personal or political
considerations rather than on existing law.2 The question of judicial activism is closely related
to constitutional interpretation, statutory construction, and separation of powers.

Black's Law Dictionary: defines judicial activism as a "philosophy of judicial decision-making


whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy, among other factors, to guide
their decisions." Judicial activism means active role played by the judiciary in promoting justice.
Judicial Activism to define broadly, is the assumption of an active role on the part of the
judiciary.3 Ronald Dworkin, for example, rejects a “strict interpretation” of the constitutional text
because it limits constitutional rights “to those recognised by a limited group of people at a fixed
date of history.”

1
Massey, I.P. “Judicial Activism and the Growth of Administrative Jurisprudence in India: A Retrospect.” Indian Bar
Review (IBR) 17.1- 2 (1990): 55 – 77.
2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_activism
3
Chaterji Susanta, “ ‘For Public Administration’ Is judicial activism really deterrent to legislative anarchy and
executive tyranny ? “, The Administrator, Vol XLII, April-June 1997, p9, at p11

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

According to Jurists:
According to Prof. Upendra Baxi, Judicial Activism is an inscriptive term. It means different
things to different people. While some may exalt the term by describing it as judicial creativity,
dynamism of the judges, bringing a revolution in the field of human rights and social welfare
through enforcement of public duties etc., others have criticized the term by describing it as
judicial extremism, judicial terrorism, transgression into the domains of the other organs of the
State negating the constitutional spirit etc.

Judicial activism implies going beyond the normal constraints applied to jurists and the
Constitution, which gives jurists the right to strike down any legislation or rule against the
precedent if it goes against the Constitution. Thus, ruling against majority opinion or judicial
precedent is not necessarily judicial activism unless it is active. In the words of Justice J.S Verma
, Judicial Activism must necessarily mean “ the active process of implementation of the rule of
law, essential for the preservation of a functional democracy”.

Present scenario:
In a modern democratic set up, judicial activism should be looked upon as a mechanism to curb
legislative adventurism and executive tyranny by enforcing Constitutional limits. That is, it is
only when the Legislature and the Executive fail in their responsibility or try to avoid it, that
judicial activism has a role to play. In other words, judicial activism is to be viewed as a “damage
control” exercise, in which sense, it is only a temporary phase. Recent times have seen judiciary
play a intrusive roles in the areas of constitutionally reserved for the other branches of
governments. Issues in judicial activism arise, when governance is apparently done by
Mandamus4.

In the Constitution:
The Constitution of India operates in happy harmony with the instrumentalities of the executive
and the legislature. But to be truly great, the judiciary exercising democratic power must enjoy

4
Baxi, Upendra. The Indian Supreme Court and Politics. Lucknow: Eastern Book Company, 1980

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

independence of a high order5. But independence could become dangerous and undemocratic
unless there is a constitutional discipline with rules of good conduct and accountability: without
these, the robes may prove arrogant.6

Court view in case laws:


Judicial activism is the view that the Supreme Court and other judges can and should creatively
(re)interpret the texts of the Constitution and the laws in order to serve the judges' own visions
regarding the needs of contemporary society. 7Judicial activism believes that judges assume a
role as independent policy makers or independent "trustees" on behalf of society that goes
beyond their traditional role as interpreters of the Constitution and laws. The concept of judicial
activism is the polar opposite of judicial restraint.

Failure on part of the legislative and executive wings of the Government to provide ‘good
governance’ makes judicial activism an imperative. Delivering justice to a population of over a
billion does not sound like and never will be an easy task. It however becomes increasingly
difficult in a country like India. The Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary are the three
wings of the Indian democracy.

Judicial activism, however, came into its own only in the last couple of years. In his Dr. Zakir
Hussain Memorial Lecture, Former Chief Justice of India A.M. Ahmadi said, “In recent years, as
the incumbents of Parliament have become less representative of the will of the people, there has
been a growing sense of public frustration with the democratic process. This is the reason why
the (Supreme) Court had to expand its jurisdiction by, at times, issuing novel directions to the
executive.8”

5
Bakshi. P.M. Public Interest Litigations, Second edition. New Delhi: Ashoka Law House, 2006.

6
Http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/article3785898.ece
7
http://definitions.uslegal.com/j/judicial-activism/
8
Andhyarujina, T.R. “Judicial Accountability: India’s Methods and Experience.” Judges and Judicial Accountability,
Second Indian Reprint. Eds. Cyrus Das and K Chandra. Delhi: Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 2005. 101 –
130.

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

Many are critical of judicial activism as an exercise of judicial powers, which displaces existing
laws or creates more legal uncertainty than is necessary, whether or not the ruling has some
constitutional, historical or other basis. Judicial activism can be considered as “legislating from
the bench.” Some have even gone to the extent of calling it judicial tyranny. This implies that a
judge is ruling on the basis personal political convictions or emotions. Declaring that the
judiciary has a vital function to protect minority rights in a pluralist society, former Attorney
General of India Soli J Sorabjee said ''judicial activism has contributed to the protection of
fundamental human rights.9

When serious issues like environmental pollution crop up and the statutory bodies take no action
and the people suffer, the courts have to step in to alleviate human suffering, he added. Calling
upon the judiciary to evolve a ''jurisprudence of compassion'', Mr Sorabjee said the institution of
public interest litigation (PIL) had helped to secure ''fundamental rights as a living reality for
some sections of society.'' However, the senior Supreme Court lawyer cautioned that PIL ''could
not be treated as a pill for every ill'' and said that some had sought to use it as an instrument of
blackmail and oppression. The judiciary had to be vigilant against personal, political and
publicity-oriented litigation masquerading as PIL, he added. However, the abuse of PIL was not a
ground for its abolition or restriction as it had played an important role in securing justice to
suffering sections, ranging from under-trial prisoners to children working in hazardous
occupations and workers treated as slaves in quarries and kilns. Lauding Justice (Retd.) V R
Krishna Iyer for his judgments upholding rights of prisoners, Mr Sorabjee said torture was
rampant in Indian prison cells. By giving judgments against solitary confinement and
handcuffing of prisoners, Justice Krishna Iyer had upheld basic human dignity.

Judicial activism might sound, for a lay man, a heavy-duty term but in the simpler manner is
quite easy to comprehend. We can say in simple words that judicial activism is a practice by the
judges that does not involve the balance of law, instead it hampers it. In judicial activism, the
judge places his final decision with his heart and mind, which is emotionally handled. It, at

9
http://news.oneindia.in/2008/11/15/sorabjee-defends-judicial-activism-1226761401.html

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

times, works in our favour to save from the wrong decision to take place but at times it also
backfires on us. In other words we can easily say that judicial activism is the practice going
beyond the normal law for the jury. There are some very important cases which come in the talk
whenever we discuss about judicial activism in India. Bhopal gas tragedy and the Jessica Lal
Murder case are among the top two. The latter was an open and shut case for all. Money and
muscle power tried to win over the good. But lately, it was with the help of judicial activism that
the case came to at least one decision. The two most prominent figures in the Bar Council of
India whose names are the most inter related with judicial activism are Justice Prafullachandra
Natwarlal Bhagwati and Justice Vaidyanathapura Rama Krishna Iyer.

The Golak Nath case10 is an example of judicial activism. The Supreme Court by a majority of
six against five laid down that the fundamental rights as enshrined in Part-III of the Constitution
are immutable and beyond the reach of the amendatory process. The power of parliament to
amend any provision in Part-III of the Constitution was taken away. In Kesavananda Bharati
case by a majority of seven against six, the Supreme Court held that by Article 368 of the
Constitution, Parliament has amending powers. But the amendatory power does not extend to
alter the basic structure or framework of the Constitution. The basic features of the Constitution
being : (i) Supremacy of the Constitution; (ii) Republican and Democratic form of government;
(iii) Secularism; (iv) Separation of powers between the legislature, the executive and the
judiciary; and (v) Federal character of the Constitution. Supremacy and permanency of the
Constitution have thus been ensured by the pronouncement of the summit court of the country
with the result that the basic features of the Constitution are now beyond the reach of
Parliament11.

Reasons:
After making these observations certain reasons can be generalized which lead to judicial
activism. The following are some of the well accepted reasons which compel a court or a judge

10
DR. BHURE LAL, “Judicial Activism and Accountability”, Siddharth Publications, ISBN : 81-7220-158-3,p38-39
11
Pylee, M.V. Constitutions of the World, Third edition, Volume 2, Delhi: Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd.,
2006

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

to be active while discharging the judicial functions assigned to then either by a constitution or
any other organic law12.

i)Near Collapse of responsible government.


ii)Pressure on judiciary to step in aid.
iii)Judicial enthusiasm to participate in social reform and change.
iv)Legislative vacuum left open.
v)The constitutional scheme13.
vi)Authority to make final declaration as to validity of a law.
vii)Role of Judiciary as guardian of fundamental rights.
viii)Public confidence in the judiciary etc.

In the 1980’s two remarkable developments in the Indian legal system provided a strong impetus
to judicial activism in India.14 There was a broadening of existing environmental laws in the
country and judicial activity through public interest litigation began in earnest in India 15. These
two developments gave more scope to citizens and public interest groups to prosecute a
corporation or a TNC which violates environmental norms.

It is a known fact that judicial activism has given us some very good case laws and path breaking
judgments, which even led to revolutionary changes in the society, To deny judicial activism to
the courts is to nullify the judicial process and to negate justice. Take away judicial activism and
tyranny will step in to fill the vacant space. 16 It is rightly stated by former Justice, Hidaytuallah
that “The first principle to observe is that the wisdom of the law must be accepted. A little

12
Omdutt role of judiciary in the democratic system of india (judicial activism under the supreme court of india) :
golden research thoughts (sept ; 2012)
13
Seervai, H.M. Constitutional Law of India – A Critical Commentary, Fourth edition, Volume 1,2, 3. New Delhi:
Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., Reprint 2011
14
by Pranay Lal and Veena Jha, “Judicial activism and the environment in India. Implications for transnational
corporations”, Occasional paper no.6, report as part of unctad /cbs project: Cross Border Environmental
Management In Transnational Corporations
15
Jain, M.P. Indian Constitutional Law, Fifth edition. New Delhi : Wadhwa and Company, Reprint 2008
16
Madon, D.P., Conference Paper, the Third International Conference of Appellate Judges, p.207 at p.210.

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

incursion into law-making interstitially, as Holmes put it, may be permissible. For other cases the
attention of Parliament and/or Government can be drawn to the flaw.”17

In India, although the activism versus restraint debate existed even in the pre-Constitution
period, it did not vigorously take-off till the 1970s when the Supreme Court of India itself
became very active. However, the underlying philosophical issue of the relationship between
means and ends has been long debated in Indian philosophy. 18Mahatma Gandhi who advocated
that the means used for achieving a particular result must also be as acceptable as the result
itself. As we shall see, the saga of judicial decision-making by the highest court in India indicates
that judicial activism or the mere pursuit of ends without regard to the means, has become the
dominant approach in judicial thinking19.

With this background, it becomes necessary for the Judge to ask, like Hamlet, whether it is
nobler in the mind to remain impervious to the dominant discourse around, or to trim the sails of
his thinking to the winds blowing around. This is a question of great moment, which must haunt
any conscientious Judge. Tradition and good sense demand that, irrespective of the political
debate around, the Judge maintains a neutral stance in his decision-making, being guided only by
accepted legal principles and the dictates of his conscience 20. The Judge being human, the social
ambience in which he operates is likely to affect his judgment, but the extent to which he
disallows this to happen determines his mettle21.

It was rightly put by legal luminary, Former Justice, Shri B.N Shrikrishna , in his article Skinning
the Cat that undesirable consequences ensuing from Judicial activism are delay, backlog and
abuse of public interest litigation, expediency and judicial error, credibility of institution is
questioned in certain situations, diversion of institutional resources for the purposes other than
17
Justice M. Hidayatullah, Highways and Bye-Lanes of Justice, (1984) 2 SCC J-1 at p. 5
18
By Justice B.N. Srikrishna, SKINNING A CAT , (2005) 8 SCC (J) 3
19
Pandey, J.N. The Constitutional Law of India, Forty Seventh edition. Allahabad: All Central Law Agency, 2010.
20
Basu, Dr. Durga Das. Introduction to the Constitution of India, 19th Edition. Gurgaon, Haryana: Lexis Nexis
Butterworths Wadhwa Nagpur, Reprint 2005.
21
Iyer, Justice Krishna. Justice at Crossroads. New Delhi: Deep & Deep Publications, 1991.

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

constitutionally assigned and finally judicial activism is personality drivern than institutionalized
adjudication.

IMPLICATIONS:

The landscape of recent Supreme Court rulings offers some interesting insights into the
metamorphosis of judicial activism in India.22 Most strikingly, the Supreme Court recently issued
a notice to the Union government seeking an explanation of the steps taken by it to ameliorate
the plight of Indian students in Australia, who have been facing racially motivated attacks.
Foreign policy is widely considered to be non-justifiable, that is, courts cannot interfere 23. Yet,
the interference by Indian courts has not wholly been condemned24. The next, and almost equally
striking, instance is a Supreme Court notice questioning the proliferation of Mayawati statues,
allegedly worth crores of rupees, in Uttar Pradesh. Like foreign policy, budgetary allocations
(butter, guns or statues?) are non-justiciable. But judicial interference in this matter too has not
been deprecated, nor is it worthy of serious censure.

However, judicial activism in India has now taken on an interesting face. The courts in India
pursue a form of review which can be described at best as ‘dialogic’ — a term used famously by
Peter Hogg and Allison Bushell in the context of the Canadian Supreme Court’s decisions. The
Indian Supreme Court’s gaze has now gone beyond the protection of the socially and
economically downtrodden, and into the realm of public administration. However, its opinions
often resemble aspirations rather than binding pronouncements. For example, the Supreme Court
issued guidelines in 2006 to reform the police administration – which is a State subject on which
only the State Assemblies can legislate. Similar guidelines have been issued increasingly in
legislative spheres. Because of these opinions, at least in theory, employers must now act against
22
http://www.hindu.com/2009/07/18/stories/2009071852820800.htm
23
Baxi, Upendra. “The Avatars of Indian Judicial Activism: Explorations in the Geographies of [In] Justice” Fifty
Years of the Supreme Court of India: Its Grasp and Reach. Eds. S.K. Verma & Kusum. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press, 2007. 156 – 209
24
Dicey, A.V. An Introduction to the study of the Law of the Constitution, Tenth edition, Second Indian Reprint.
New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd, 1998

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

sexual harassment at the workplace, banks must be prudent in their use of recovery agents, and
police officers must follow procedures prior to an arrest, mildly similar to the
American Miranda rights. (In India, they could perhaps be called ‘Basu’ rights, considering D.K.
Basu v. State of West Bengal, 1986).

In the 2G Licenses case, the Court held that all public resources and assets are a matter of public
trust and they can only be disposed of in a transparent manner by a public auction to the highest
25
bidder. This has led to the President making a Reference to the Court for the Court’s legal
advice under Article 143 of the Constitution. In the same case, the Court set aside the expert
opinion of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) to sell 2G spectrum without
auction to create greater tele-density in India.

The Court has for all practical purposes disregarded the separation of powers under the
Constitution, and assumed a general supervisory function over other branches of governments.
The temptation to rush to the Supreme Court and High Courts for any grievance against a public
authority has also deflected the primary responsibility of citizens themselves in a representative
self government of making legislators and the executive responsible for their actions. The answer
often given by the judiciary to this type of overreach is that it is compelled to take upon this task
as the other branches of government have failed in their obligations. On this specious
justification, the political branches of government may, by the same logic, take over the
functions of the judiciary when it has failed, and there can be no doubt that there are many areas
where the judiciary has failed to meet the expectations of the public by its inefficiency and areas
of cases.

Justice Jackson of the U.S. has aptly said: “The doctrine of judicial activism which justifies easy
and constant readiness to set aside decisions of other branches of Government is wholly
incompatible with a faith in democracy and in so far it encourages a belief that judges should be
left to correct the result of public indifference it is a vicious teaching.” Unless the parameters of
PIL are strictly formulated by the Supreme Court and strictly observed, PIL which is so

25
http://indialawyers.wordpress.com/2012/08/06/disturbing-trends-in-judicial-activism/

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

necessary in India, is in danger of becoming diffuse, unprincipled, encroaching into the functions
of other branches of government and ineffective by its indiscriminate use26.

In recent orders, the Supreme Court has directed the most complex engineering of interlinking
rivers in India. 27The Court has passed orders banning the pasting of black film on automobile
windows. On its own, the Court has taken notice of Baba Ramdev being forcibly evicted from
the Ramlila grounds by the Delhi Administration and censured it. The Court has ordered the
exclusion of tourists in the core area of tiger reserves. All these managerial exercises by the
Court are hung on the dubious jurisdictional peg of enforcing fundamental rights under Article
32 of the Constitution. In reality, no fundamental rights of individuals or any legal issues are at
all involved in such cases. The Court is only moved for better governance and administration,
which does not involve the exercise of any proper judicial function.

On the other hand in its activist and controversial interpretation of the Constitution, the Supreme
Court took away the constitutionally conferred power of the President of India to appoint judges
after consultation with the Chief Justice, and appropriated this power in the Chief Justice of India
and a collegium of four judges. In no Constitution in the world is the power to select and appoint
judges conferred on the judges themselves28.

The Court is made the monitor of the conduct of investigating and prosecution agencies who are
perceived to have failed or neglected to investigate and prosecute ministers and officials of
governmen29t. Cases of this type are the investigation and prosecution of ministers and officials
believed to be involved in the Jain Hawala case, the fodder scam involving the former Chief
Minister of Bihar, Lalu Prasad Yadav, the Taj Corridor case involving the former Chief Minister
of Uttar Pradesh, Mayawati, and the recent prosecution of the Telecom Minister and officials in
the 2G Telecom scam case by the Supreme Court.
26
Dias, R W M. Jurisprudence, Fifth edition, First Indian Reprint. New Delhi: Aditya Books Private Limited, 1994
27
http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/disturbing-trends-in-judicial-activism/article3731471.ece
28
Bhatia, K.L. Judicial Review and Judicial Activism (A Comparative study of India and Germany from an Indian
perspective). New Delhi: Deep & Deep Publications, 1997
29
Saptnekar, Meera. “The Role of the Judiciary in Judicial Activism.” Indian Bar Review (IBR) 25.1 (1998): 69 – 75

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

CONCLUSION

The Judiciary cannot take over the functions of the Executive. The Courts themselves must
display prudence and moderation and be conscious of the need for comity of instrumentalities as
basic to good governance. Judicial activism has to be welcomed and its implications assimilated
in letter and spirit. An activist Court is surely far more effective than a legal positivist
conservative Court to protect the society against legislative adventurism and executive tyranny.
When our chosen representatives have failed to give us a welfare state, let it spring from the
Judiciary.

The power of judicial review is recognized as part of the basic structure of the Indian
Constitution. The activist role of the Judiciary is implicit in the said power. Judicial activism is a
sine qua non of democracy because without an alert and enlightened judiciary, the democracy
will be reduced to an empty shell. Judicial activism in its totality cannot be banned. It is obvious
that under a constitution, a fundamental feature of which is the rule of law, there cannot be any
restraint upon judicial activism in matters in which the legality of executive orders and

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

administrative actions is questioned. The courts are the only forum for those wronged by
administrative excesses and executive arbitrariness.

Judicial activism is not an aberration. It is an essential aspect of the dynamics of a constitutional


court.30 It is a counter-majoritarian check on democracy. Judicial activism, however, does not
mean governance by the judiciary. Judicial activism must also function within the limits of the
judicial process.

The judiciary is the weakest body of the state. It becomes strong only when people repose faith
in it.31 Such faith constitutes the legitimacy of the Court and of judicial activism. Courts must
continuously strive to sustain their legitimacy. Courts do not have to bow to public pressure, but
rather they should stand firm against public pressure. What sustains legitimacy of judicial
activism is not its submission to populism, but its capacity to withstand such pressure without
sacrificing impartiality and objectivity. Courts must not only be fair, they must appear to be fair.
Such inarticulate and diffused consensus about the impartiality and integrity of the judiciary is
the source of the Court’s legitimacy.

Take away judicial activism and tyranny will step in to fill the vacant space.

So to sum up the judicial activism in India, it will be very appropriate to quote the words of Dr.
A.S. Anand, Chief Justice of India who said :

"…. the Supreme Court is the custodian of the Indian Constitution and exercises judicial control
over the acts of both the legislature and the executive."

I would like to conclude by stating that the Courts are not above the Constitution and must be
conscious of the conscience of the Preamble.

30
S.P. Sathe, Judicial Activism: The Indian Experience, 6 Wash. U. J. L. & Pol’y 029 (2001)
31
http://digitalcommons.law.wustl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1443&context=wujlp

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

 Andhyarujina, T.R. “Judicial Accountability: India’s Methods and Experience.” Judges


and Judicial Accountability, Second Indian Reprint. Eds. Cyrus Das and K Chandra.
Delhi: Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 2005. 101 – 130.

 Basu, Dr. Durga Das. Introduction to the Constitution of India, 19th Edition. Gurgaon,
Haryana: Lexis Nexis Butterworths Wadhwa Nagpur, Reprint 2005.

 Baxi, Upendra. The Indian Supreme Court and Politics. Lucknow: Eastern Book
Company, 1980.

 Bakshi. P.M. Public Interest Litigations, Second edition. New Delhi: Ashoka Law House,
2006.

 Baxi, Upendra. “The Avatars of Indian Judicial Activism: Explorations in the


Geographies of [In] Justice” Fifty Years of the Supreme Court of India: Its Grasp and

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

Reach. Eds. S.K. Verma & Kusum. New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2007. 156 –
209.

 Bhatia, K.L. Judicial Review and Judicial Activism (A Comparative study of India and
Germany from an Indian perspective). New Delhi: Deep & Deep Publications, 1997.

 Dias, R W M. Jurisprudence, Fifth edition, First Indian Reprint. New Delhi: Aditya
Books Private Limited, 1994.

 Dicey, A.V. An Introduction to the study of the Law of the Constitution, Tenth edition,
Second Indian Reprint. New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd, 1998.

 Iyer, Justice Krishna. Justice at Crossroads. New Delhi: Deep & Deep Publications, 1991.

 Jain, M.P. Indian Constitutional Law, Fifth edition. New Delhi : Wadhwa and Company,
Reprint 2008.

 Kirby, Justice Michael. Judicial Activism – Authority, Principle and Policy in the Judicial
Method. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 2004.

 Pylee, M.V. Constitutions of the World, Third edition, Volume 2, Delhi: Universal Law
Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., 2006.

 Pandey, J.N. The Constitutional Law of India, Forty Seventh edition. Allahabad: All
Central Law Agency, 2010.

 Paranjape, N.V. Studies in Jurisprudence and Legal Theory, 2nd edition. Allahabad:
Central Law Agency, 2007.

 Seervai, H.M. Constitutional Law of India – A Critical Commentary, Fourth edition,


Volume 1,2, 3. New Delhi: Universal Law Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., Reprint 2011.

STATUTE REFERRED:

 The Constitution of India, 1950

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

DICTIONARIES

 Black’s Law Dictionary, 7th edition. St. Paul, Minnesota: West Group, 1999.

 Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law. Springfield, Massachusetts: Merriam–Webster


Inc., 1999.

 Agarwala’s Legal Dictionary. Agra: Law Book Publishers, 1997.

ARTICLES FROM LAW JOURNALS

 Massey, I.P. “Judicial Activism and the Growth of Administrative Jurisprudence in India:
A Retrospect.” Indian Bar Review (IBR) 17.1- 2 (1990): 55 – 77.
 Mir, Mehraj– ud –din. “Judicial Activism: An Overview.” Kashmir University Law
Review (KULR) XIV (2007): 110 – 119
 Saptnekar, Meera. “The Role of the Judiciary in Judicial Activism.” Indian Bar Review
(IBR) 25.1 (1998): 69 – 75
WEBSITES REFERRED:

 www.adminlaw.org.uk/.../Professor%
 http://ujala.uk.gov.in/files/issue%202/2Ch-5.pdf
 http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles
 https://figshare.com/articles/
 http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/print.php?art_id=1616
 http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles
 http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/print.php?art_id=1616
 www.grkarelawlibrary.yolasite.com
 www.hrdc.net
 www.hrlibrary.umn.edu
 www.lawcommissionofindia.com
 www.lawweb.in
 www.mba.nic
 www.mhal.nic.in
 www.nerb.nic.in
 www.ohchr.org
 www.thehindu.com

JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS

 www.tsprisons.gov.in
 www.un.org

JUDICIAL PROCESS