Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Judicial activism is a judicial philosophy holding that courts can and should go beyond the applicable law to consider broader societal implications of their decisions. It is sometimes used as an antonym of judicial restraint . [ 1 ]
Justice Vaidyanathapuram Rama Iyer Krishna Iyer (15 November 1914 – 4 December 2014) was an Indian judge [1] who became a pioneer of judicial activism. He pioneered the legal-aid movement in the country. Before that, he was a state minister and politician.
He was known for his judicial innovation through landmark judgements, which made him "the face of judicial activism" in India. [2] His decisions were credited with the forging of powerful new judicial tools such as continuing mandamus , [ 3 ] and the expanded protection of fundamental rights as in the Vishaka Judgement . [ 4 ]
The term judicial review finds no mention in the Constitution of India but the Constitution implicitly provides for judicial review through Articles 13, 32 and through 136, 142 and 226. [ 2 ] Judicial review is one of the checks and balances in the separation of powers , the power of the judiciary to supervise the legislative and executive ...
The chief instrument through which judicial activism has flourished in India is public interest litigation (PIL) or social action litigation (SAL).It refers to litigation undertaken to secure public interest and demonstrates the availability of justice to socially-disadvantaged parties and was introduced by Justice P. N. Bhagwati and Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer.
P. N. Bhagwati was born in Gujarat.His father was Justice Natwarlal H. Bhagwati, a Supreme Court judge. [2] He was the elder brother of the economist Jagdish Bhagwati and the neurosurgeon/president of the Neurological Society of India S. N. Bhagwati - father of economist Ketki Bhagwati. [3]
Others noted the judgment as the expression of judicial activism because only a two-judge bench had made a substantial change in constitution. [7] The decisionappeared while liberalisation was a government policy looking for Indian soil to sprout, and commercialisation of education was not as rampant as it is now. [8]
Vishaka and Ors. v. State of Rajasthan was a 1997 Indian Supreme Court case where various women's groups led by Naina Kapur and her organisation, Sakshi filed Public Interest Litigation (PIL) against the state of Rajasthan and the central Government of India to enforce the fundamental rights of working women under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.