JUDICIAL PROCESS
JUDICIAL REVIEW
INDEX
S.No PARTICULARS PAGE
NO
1 JUDICIAL REVIEW 2
2 MEANING OF JUDICIAL REVIEW 2
3 MADBURY v MADISSON 3
4 JUDICIAL REVIEW IN USA 3
5 JUDICIAL REVIEW IN UK 4
6 JUDICIAL REVIEW IN INDIA 5
7 IMPORTANCE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW 6
8 CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW IN 6
INDIA
9 TYPES OF JUDICIAL REVIEW 7
10 FEATURES OF JUDICIAL REVIEW IN INDIA 7
11 DIMENSIONS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW IN INDIA 8
12 DOCTRINE OF ULTRA VIRES 8
13 BENEFITS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW 8
14 PROBLEMS WITH JUDICIAL REVIEW 9
15 IMPORTANT DOCTRINES FORMULATED BY COURT 10
16 JUDICIAL REVIEW AND NINTH SCHEDULE 13
17 JUDICIAL REVIEW THROUGH CASE LAWS 14
18 PRESENT SCENARIO OF JUDICIAL REVIEW IN INDIA 15
19 CONCLUSION 16
1|Pa ge
INTRODUCTION:
The concept of judicial review flows from the concept of limited
government as it is assumed that there is a paramount law which constitutes the foundation
and source of all other legislative authority and therefore it follows that any act of the
ordinary law making bodies which contravenes the provisions of the paramount law must be
void. According to the definition given by Britannica, Judicial review is the power of the
courts of a country to examine the actions of the legislative, executive, and administrative
arms of the government and to determine whether such actions are consistent with the
constitution. 1 Thus judicial review helps understand more clearly that the Constitution of
any country is the supreme law of the land and any law inconsistent with it is void. It can also
be said that judicial review has two prime functions i. e. legitimizing government actions and
to protect the constitution against any undue governmental encroachment. Judicial review
thus protects the sanctity of the constitution and gives supremacy to it and assures rule of law
in any country.
MEANING OF JUDICIAL REVIEW:
The dictionary meaning of review is “the act of looking over something (again) with a view
to correction or improvement”1 The primary legal meaning of the term, accordingly, is the
revision of the sentence or decree of one court by a higher court. But the review of inferior
judicial pronouncements by a higher tribunal, which is analogous to appeal, has no particular
importance in Constitutional law. It appertains to the judicial administration, in some form or
other, of every modern country, irrespective of the nature of its constitutional system, and has
no bearing on public law in particular.
The concept of ‘Judicial Review’ has been defined as the power of the courts to pass a law or
a statute depending upon the constitutionality of such law or legislative act and also the
power to refuse to enforce such acts if found to be unconstitutional. Such unconstitutional
acts are thereby declared as void. However, when the judiciary invalidates any legislation or
strikes down any executive action, it does not yearn for a confrontation with Parliament or
Executive. Here, the court discharges its duty as a judicial sentine.
1
Shorter Oxford English Dictionary
2|Pa ge
Judicial review is different from right of appeal. An appeal is a statutory right. An
appellate body receives power from a statute to decide the whole case again. An appellate
body can change the lower court‟s verdict and give its own decision over the issue. Contrary
to this, in case of judicial review, the courts have limited powers. The courts do not act as an
appellate authority while doing judicial review. In case of judicial review, the courts inquire
how the decision was reached. The superior court scrutinises the whole decision-making
process and checks whether the decision was made lawfully or not. If the superior court finds
the decision unlawful, it cannot make a fresh decision but sends the matter back to the
decision-making authority.
MADBURY V MADDISON2:
Marbury v. Madison6 is seen as the first cases wherein the concept
judicial review was recognised. In this case Chief Justice Marshall laid down that the
judiciary has the power to examine the laws made by the legislature. It was also declared that
if any such law is found to be in violation of the constitution, then such a law would be
declared by the court as ultra - vires of the constitution. Thus it can be said that judicial
review as a doctrine is accepted in all legal systems and it usually find its place in the cases
laws and is not expressly provided in the Constitution of the countries, however few express
provisions are mentioned in different constitutions from which the doctrine of judicial review
gain authority.
JUDICIAL REVIEW IN USA:
The concept of judicial review can be traced back to ancient times.
The Athenian judges were bound by those laws only insofar as they were consistent with the
higher law. According to Thomas Aquinas, natural law was a supreme law
having divine origins to which everybody was subjected. The sovereign‟s action against
natural law was declared void. The judge was bound to declare administrative actions void if
they were contrary to natural law. Even the individual subjects were not under any duty to
obey those commandments which were against the natural law. The doctrine of judicial
2
William Madbury v James Madison 5 US 137
3|Pa ge
review, in its modern sense, has been originated in the United States of America. Moreover,
practices of the doctrine in United States also influenced many countries in the whole world.
However, Judicial review had been used both by the state and federal court judges even
before Marbury v Madison, by declaring many laws unconstitutional which were not in
consistent to the state constitution or federal constitution. Marshall‟s opinion was important
not because it was first but because it was the first statement of the doctrine of judicial review
given by the nation‟s Supreme Court. The United States Supreme Court in the case of Brown
v Board of Education 3 invalidated segregated laws dividing whites and blacks, and held that
separate education facilities are discriminatory in nature.
JUDICIAL REVIEW IN UK:
In the United Kingdom, the scope of judicial review is narrower because Parliament is
supreme. Parliamentary supremacy and the rule of law empower the courts to compel the
government to act within their limits framed by legislation. But courts are not empowered to
override legislation. Courts are bound to respect the doctrine of ministerial responsibility to
Parliament. Courts cannot substitute their views on the merits of government action for those
of the government. Courts cannot interfere in the high-level political activity However, the
courts examine the actions of public bodies and protect the will of Parliament.
In Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for the Civil Service
4
Lord Diplock classified the grounds of judicial review under the three heads of „illegality,
irrationality and procedural impropriety. He also recognised that further concepts such as
„proportionality‟ might evolve.
3
347 U.S. 483 (1954).
4
[1985] AC 374.
4|Pa ge
JUDICIAL REVIEW IN INDIA:
ANCIENT PERIOD:
The ancient India concept of law is the king of kings and nothing can be
higher than law by whose aid even the weak prevail over the strong. The Vedic concept of
sovereignty was that the State was a trust and the monarch was the trustee of the people. The
address of the people to the monarch at time of coronations and the reply of the consecrated
king to his people on the occasion of Abhisheka (coronation) embodied in the Yajurveda
reveals the concept of ideal, kingship and the democratic concept of law and governance
which required ancient India. In ancient India the Rule of Law had a firm stand which meant
that the law was above the ruler and that the government had no constitutional authority to
enforce any arbitrary or tyrannical law against the government. Thus the people of ancient
India visualized and cherished the supremacy of law and not the supremacy of the king.
PRE- AND POST INDEPENDENCE:
Judicial review of India for the first time saw its light in Emperor v.
Burah.5 The Calcutta High Court as well as Privy Council adopted the view that the Indian
courts had power of judicial review under certain limitations. This view was further
reaffirmed in certain other case before the Government of India Act, 1935 came into
operation. By the Government of India Act of 1935, Federation was introduced and the
experiment in judicial review took a new approach under the Constitution of 1950, judicial
review assumed an important role in the Indian democracy. Its working under the present
Constitution of India is a real protection of liberty and freedom of the people. Some Indian
writers have observed that the scope of judicial review in India is very limited and the Indian
Courts do not enjoy as wide jurisdiction as do Courts in America. In their opinion it is due to
the ‘due process’ clause that the America courts have wider scope but in India the scope of
judicial review is narrow.
5
(1877) ILR, Calcutta, 63
5|Pa ge
IMPORTANCE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW:
As observed by the Supreme Court in its various judgments, the doctrine of Judicial Review
holds significant importance for the following main reasons:
• To uphold the principle of the supremacy of the Constitution.
• To protect the Fundamental Rights of the citizens.
• To maintain federal equilibrium, i.e. balance between the Centre and the states.
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW IN INDIA:
The Indian Constitution adopted the Judicial Review on lines of U.S. Constitution.
Parliament is not supreme under the Constitution of India. Its powers are limited in a manner
that the power is divided between centre and states. Moreover the Supreme Court enjoys a
position which entrusts it with the power of reviewing the legislative enactments both of
Parliament and the State Legislatures. This grants the court a powerful instrument of judicial
review under the constitution. Both the political theory and text of the Constitution has
granted the judiciary the power of judicial review of legislation. The Constitutional
Provisions which guarantee judicial review of legislation are Articles 13, 32, 131-136, 143,
226, 145, 246, 251, 254 and 372
Article 372 (1) establishes the judicial review of the pre-constitution legislation.
Article 13 declares that any law which contravenes any of the provisions of the part of
Fundamental Rights shall be void.
Articles 32 and 226 entrusts the roles of the protector and guarantor of fundamental rights to
the Supreme and High Courts. Article 251 and 2547 states that in case of inconsistency
between union and state laws, the state law shall be void. Article 246 (3)8 ensures the state
legislature’s exclusive powers on matters pertaining to the State List. Article 2459 states that
the powers of both Parliament and State legislatures are subject to the provisions of the
constitution. The legitimacy of any legislation can be challenged in the court of law on the
grounds that the legislature is not competent enough to pass a law on that particular subject
matter; the law is repugnant to the provisions of the constitutions; or the law infringes one of
the fundamental rights. Articles 131-13610 entrusts the court with the power to adjudicate
disputes between individuals, between individuals and the state, between the states and the
6|Pa ge
union; but the court may be required to interpret the provisions of the constitution and the
interpretation given by the Supreme Court becomes the law honored by all courts of the land.
It must be remember that there is no express provision in our constitution empowering the
courts to invalidate laws, but the constitution has imposed definite limitations upon each of
the organs, the transgression of which would make the law void. The court is entrusted with
the task of deciding whether any of the constitutional limitations has been transgressed or not.
TYPES OF JUDICIAL REVIEW:
Reviews of Legislative Actions:
This review implies the power to ensure that laws passed by the legislature are in
compliance with the provisions of the Constitution.
Review of Administrative Actions:
This is a tool for enforcing constitutional discipline over administrative agencies while
exercising their powers.
Review of Judicial Decisions:
This review is used to correct or make any change in previous decisions by the judiciary
itself.
FEATURES OF JUDICIAL REVIEW IN INDIA:
1. Judicial Review Power used by both Supreme Court and High courts of India Both
Supreme Court and High courts Exercise the power of judicial review but ultimate and final
power to determine the constitutional validity is in the hands of Supreme Court of India.
2. Judicial Review of Both Central and State Law Judicial Review can be conduct on both
central and state law the order and ordinance of both constitutional and executive
amendments held.
3. Limitations Judicial Review cannot be conduct on Laws dealt in ninth schedule of
Constitution of India
4. Covers Question in Law not any Political Question Judicial Review covers only Question
of Law it does not covers any Political question or conflict
5. Judicial Review is not Sue motto Supreme Court does not use its power of judicial review
by sue motto action, it can use it when such question comes before it or during court
proceeding any such challenges comes before it.
7|Pa ge
DIMENSIONS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW IN INDIA:
The power of judicial review can be used in three dimensions such as Judicial Review of
Constitutional Amendments, Legislative Acts and Administrative Acts. Whereas US
Constitution is very rigid in nature therefore review of Constitutional amendment in very
rarely used. However, Supreme Court of US has power to scrutinize the Legislative Act and
Administrative Act which is contrary to the Constitution. While in UK there is no scope to
check the validity of Legislative acts of Parliament, but secondary legislations are subject to
judicial review.
DOCTRINE OF ULTRA VIRES :
Judicial review of Administrative Acts is very wide in nature and is subject to judicial review
in all the three countries. All the executive actions can be determined by Courts if they are
illegal, irrational or mala fide in nature. All the administrative and ministerial acts can be
challenged if they exceed their power as doctrine of ultra vires exist in all the three countries.
BENEFITS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW:
Some of the major benefits of judicial review can be seen as follows:
• Upholds Constitutional Supremacy – Judicial review reinforces the principle that
the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and ensures that all laws and
government actions must conform to the principles and values enshrined in the
Constitution.
• Checks and Balances – By exercising judicial review, courts serve as a check on the
powers of the legislative and executive branches of government. This helps maintain a
balance of power and prevents any single branch from becoming too dominant or
abusing its authority.
• Checks Misuse of Powers – It helps check the misuse of power by the legislature and
executive. This, in turn, prevents the possibility of tyranny of the government.
• Protects Citizens’ Rights – Judicial review acts as a safeguard against government
actions that infringe upon the rights and liberties of individuals guaranteed by the
Constitution.
8|Pa ge
• Maintains Federal Balance – It helps settle any dispute related to the division of
powers between the Center and the States. This, in turn, ensures that the federal
balance is maintained.
• Independence of Judiciary – By checking the executive and legislature from
encroaching upon the judiciary’s jurisdiction, it helps secure the independence of the
judiciary.
• Protection of Minority Rights – Judicial review serves as a bulwark against the
tyranny of the majority by protecting the rights of minority groups from oppressive or
discriminatory legislation targeting vulnerable or marginalized communities.
• Accountability and Transparency – Judicial review enhances transparency and
accountability in governance to ensure that government decisions are subject to public
scrutiny and vigilance.
PROBLEMS WITH JUDICIAL REVIEW:
The major criticisms of the doctrine of the Judicial Review can be seen as follows:
• Frequent Interference – Some critics fear frequent judicial interventions in
governmental decisions or policies in the name of judicial review. This, in turn, can
create uncertainty and instability in governance.
• Fear of Judicial Overreach – Critics argue that judicial review can lead to judicial
overreach, where courts overstep their boundaries and encroach upon the domains of
the legislature and executive.
• Delays and Backlogs – Judicial review processes can be time-consuming and costly,
leading to delays in resolving legal disputes and creating backlogs in court systems.
This can hinder the timely resolution of important legal issues.
• Undermining Democracy – Some argue that unelected judges wielding the power to
invalidate laws can undermine the powers of elected representatives. This goes
against the basic principle of democracy.
9|Pa ge
SOME IMPORTANT DOCTRINES FORMULATED BY COURTS THROUGH THE
JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION:
(a) Doctrine of Severability:
Under Article 13 of the constitution incorporates this doctrine. In
Art. 13 the word “to the extent of contravention” are the basis of doctrine of
severability. This doctrine enumerates that the court can separate the offending
part unconstitutional of the impugned legislation from the rest of its
legislation. Other parts of the legislation shall remain operative, if that is
possible. This doctrine has been considerations of equality and prudence. It the
valid and invalid parts are so inextricably mixed up that they cannot be
separated the entire provision is to be void. This is known as “doctrine of
severability”. In A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras case,6 section 14 of
prevention Detention Act was founded out to be in violation of Article 14 of
the constitution. It was also held that it is section 14 of the Act which is to be
struck down not the act as a whole. It was also held that the omission of
section 14 the Act will not change the object of the Act and hence it is
severable.
In State of Bombay v. F.N. Balsara,7 eight sections of the Bombay
Prohibition Act, 1949, were held ultra vires on the ground that they infringed
the fundamental right of the citizens. But the Act, minus the invalid
provisions, was allowed to stand. The Court said: “The decision declaring
some of the provisions of the Act to be invalid do not affect the validity of the
Act as it remains”. The rule that the invalidity is only to the extent of
inconsistency is not peculiar to Article 13, but is a general principle of
statutory interpretation.
(b )Doctrine of Waiver:
The question of waiving of fundamental rights arose in Bashesher
Nath v. I.T. Commissioner.8 In this case, the petitioner regarding Income Tax
6
AIR 1950 SC 27.
7
AIR 1951 SC 318.
8
AIR 1959 SC 149.
10 | P a g e
had been referred to the Income Tax Commissioner under Section 5(1) of the
Income Tax Act, 1947 and it was found that he had concealed a large amount
of his income. In order to escape from heavy punishment, he agreed as a
settlement under section 5-A of the Act to pay Rs. 3 lack in in installments by
way of arrears of tax and penalty.
(c)Doctrine of eclipse:
An existing law inconsistent with a fundamental right, though becomes
inoperative from the date of the commencement of the Constitution, is not
dead altogether. “It is overshadowed by the fundamental right and remains
dormant, but is not dead.
It is a good law if a question arises for determination of rights and obligations
incurred before the commencement of the Constitution, and also for the
determination of rights of persons who have not been given fundamental rights
by the Constitution. This has led the Supreme Court to apply to the existing
laws. i.e. the Pre-Constitution laws, what may be described as the doctrine of
eclipse. According to this doctrine, an existing law, i.e., a law made before the
commencement of the Constitution, remains eclipsed or dormant to the extent
it comes under the shadow of the fundamental right, i.e., is inconsistent with it,
but the eclipsed or dormant parts become operative and effective again if the
prohibition brought about by the fundamental right is removed by an
amendment of the Constitution. The Supreme Court decision in Bhikaji
Narain Dhakras v. State of M.P.,9 is a good illustration of the application of
the rule.
(d)Doctrine of prospective overruling:
The basic meaning of prospective overruling is to construe an earlier
decision in a way so as to suit the present day needs, but in such a way that it
does not create a binding effect upon the parties to the case or other parties
bound by the precedent. The use of this doctrine overrules an earlier laid down
precedent with effect limited to future cases and all the events that occurred
before it are bound by the old precedent itself. In simpler terms it means that
9
AIR 1955 SC 781.
11 | P a g e
the court is laying down a new law for the future. This doctrine was
propounded in India in the case of GolakNathv. State of Punjab,10 the court
overruled the decisions laid down in Sajjan Singh11and Shankari Prasad12
cases and propounded doctrine of prospective overruling. The judges of
Supreme Court of India laid down its view on this doctrine in very substantive
way, by saying “The doctrine of prospective overruling is a modern doctrine
suitable for a fast moving society”. The Supreme Court applied the doctrine of
prospective overruling and held that this decision will have only prospective
operation and therefore, the first, fourth and nineteenth amendment will
continue to be valid.
(e)Doctrine of colourable legislation
This doctrine was applied by Mohajan J. in Dwakadas v Sholapur
Co.,13to determine whether the Sholapur Spinning Company (Emergency
Provisions) Ordinance, 1950 contravened the provision of Article 31 (2) , as it
then stood: “In order to decide these issues, it is necessary to examine with
some strictness the substance of the legislation for the purpose of determining
what it is that the legislature has really done; the court, when such questions
arise, is not over persuaded by the mere appearance of the legislation. In
relation constitutional prohibitions binding a legislative it is clear that the
legislative cannot disobey the prohibitions merely by employing indirect
method of achieving exactly the same result. Therefore, in all such cases the
court has to look behind the names, forms and appearance to discover the true
character and nature of the legislation”.41 The doctrine has it application both
as regards limitations on the legislative competence of a legislature under a
federal system as well as other constitutional limitation, such as fundamental
rights, which cannot be transgressed by the legislature. Its application with
respect to legislative power will be dealt with separately under Part-XI, post.
In the present contex, we shall discuss its bearing on constitutionality on the
ground of contravention of fundamental rights
10
AIR 1965 SC 845.
11
AIR 1965 SC 845.
12
AIR 1951 SC 458.
13
(1954) SCR 674.
12 | P a g e
JUDICIAL REVIEW AND NINTH SCHEDULE:
The ninth schedule was included in the Indian Constitution by Constitution
(first Amendment) Act, 1951, along with Article 31-B. It provides that none of
the Acts and Regulations included in the ninth schedule to the Constitution
shall be deemed to be void on the ground that they are inconsistent with any of
the rights conferred by Part-III of the Constitution. In effect, the sole purpose
of the ninth schedule read with Article 31-B is to save the Acts passed by the
legislature from the power of the judicial review of the courts. In Shankari
Prasad’s case,14 the Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the
ninth schedule. In order to overcome the verdict given in the case of
Kameswar Singh,15 and to carry out the agrarian reforms in a country,
Parliament in the first instance brought 1st amendment by which they added
Article 31-Aand 31-B read with ninth schedule to reduce the power of
judiciary to question of the constitutional validity of the land reforms
legislations. Thereby Article 31-B and ninth schedule made controlled
Constitution into uncontrolled. The constitutional amendments by which
certain legislative Acts have been included in ninth schedule of the
constitution, intend also to include all the antecedent and subsequent
amendment of these legislative Acts. But in many cases the principal Acts
alone have incorporated in in ninth schedule of the constitution and the
amending acts have not been included therein. The Supreme Court has held
that amending acts as well as the original statutes would be deemed to be
included in ninth schedule. The reason is that ordinarily if an Act is referred to
by its title it is intended to refer to that Act with all the amendments made in it
up to the date of reference.
Article 31-A was inserted as an immunity from judicial
review of the acquisition law regarding State and also the law regarding
management of any property for a limited period, extinguishment or
modification of any property for a management and amalgamation of
corporation etc. This Article debars judicial review of a legislative Act relating
14
AIR 1951 SC 458
15
AIR 1951 Pat. 91, SB.
13 | P a g e
to agrarian reforms. Article 31-B is a mechanical Article which provides that
any legislative Act or its provision, which is added in ninth schedule, is
immune from judicial review. This Article is very drastic and is a political
device to fetter the hands of the court in determining legislative lapses. The
rule made under such statutes and Regulations are immune from judicial
scrutiny.
JUDICIAL REVIEW THROUGH CASE LAWS:
In A.K.Gopalan v State of Madras16 the court held that the
Constitution is supreme and every statute has to be in conformity with the
constitutional requirements. Moreover, it is the binding duty of the courts to
decide whether any law or statute is constitutional or not.
Justice Bhagwati in Sampath Kumar v Union of India17 held that
Judicial Review cannot be abrogated by the Parliament since it is essential
feature of the Indian Constitution. Without the provision of judicial review, the
enforcement of fundamental rights would be meaningless.
In Minerva Mills case,18 Chandrachud, C.J speaking on behalf of
majority stated that fundamental rights would become a mere a piece of
decoration. A controlled constitution will be under no control. In the same
case, Bhagwati, J observed that without power of judicial review there will be
no Government of laws and the rule of law would become an illusion.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court in State of West Bengal v
Committee for Protection of Democratic Rights19 again reiterated that the
power of judicial review of the High Courts and Supreme Court under Article
226 and Article 32 respectively is the basic structure of the Indian Constitution
and cannot be abolished by an act of Parliament. The court again viewed that
judicial review gives the practical shape to the objectives of the Indian
Constitution. The Court said that the Supreme Court and High Courts can
invalidate a legislative action which violates federal structure of our nation.
16
AIR 1950 SC 27
17
AIR 1987 SC 271
18
AIR 1980 SC 1789
19
AIR 2010 SC 1476
14 | P a g e
More importantly, in the Golak Nath case 20Chief Justice Subba Rao upheld
the law making role of the judiciary. He said that Articles 32, 141 and 142 of the Indian
Constitution enable the Supreme Court to formulate legal principles to reach the ends of
justice. Therefore, all such constitutional provisions strengthen the Indian Judiciary, which in
consequence attracts peoples trust.
In Kesavananda Bharti v State of Kerala21 the Supreme Court said that the
Parliament is allowed to amend the Constitution but is not authorised to amend the „basic
structure‟ of the Indian Constitution. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that the 24th,
25th, and 29th Amendments were unconstitutional to the extent that they violate the basic
structure‟ of the Constitution.
PRESENT SCENARIO OF JUDICIAL REVIEW IN INDIA :
Supreme Court plays a very crucial role to interpret the constitutional provisions and
now the concept of Judicial Review has become a fundamental feature of the Constitutional
Jurisprudence. In Madras Bar Association v. Union of India 22, the Supreme Court
scrutinized the provisions of Companies Act, 1956 and declared some provisions ultra vires.
In this case, the petitioner challenged the constitution of NCLT and NCLAT and also
challenged the formation of the Committee, the appointment of the judicial members as well
as the technical members. Sec 409(3) (a), 409(3) (c), 411(3) and 412(2) are the provision
which provide for the Constitution of Board of company law administration. The Supreme
Court upheld the validity of NCLT and NCLAT, but declared the above mentioned provisions
ultra vires and held that these provisions are unconstitutional in nature on the ground that any
institution performing a judicial function should be constituted of members having judicial
experience and expertise and thus judicial members were to exceed the technical members so
as to maintain the essential feature of the constitution. In this way, Supreme Court of India
scrutinizes the validity of law through the Doctrine of Judicial Review
20
AIR 1967 SC 1643
21
(1973) 4 SCC 225
22
2015 S.C.C. 484 (India)
15 | P a g e
CONCLUSION:
The doctrine of Judicial Review serves as a cornerstone of democracy.
While it faces certain challenges and criticisms, its role in safeguarding constitutional
governance and preventing the abuse of power remains indispensable. It ensures that the
Constitution remains the supreme law of the land and that government actions remain within
the bounds of the Constitution. While its expansive application has occasionally invited
debates on judicial activism, its necessity in preserving the rule of law remain undisputed.
Moving forward, the judiciary must strike a balance between its role as a constitutional
guardian and respecting the separation of powers, Additionally, continuous training for judges
on evolving jurisprudential trends can further enhance the efficacy of judicial review.
16 | P a g e
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
1. NAME OF THE BOOK Indian Constitutional Law
AUTHOR M.P.JAIN
PUBLICATION LEXISNEXIS
EDITION 8th EDITION
WEBLIOGRAPHY:
1. Judicial Review: A Comparative Analysis of India, USA & UK Sargam Jain Asst.
Professor (Law) Vivekananda Institute of Professional Studies New Delhi, India
2. Paper – Advanced Constitutional Law Module – Judicial Review E PATHASHALA
3. Judicial Review: A Comparative Analysis between India & U. S. A. Harshita Jain
Assistant Professor, IILM University, Gurugram, India - International Journal of
Science and Research (IJSR)
4. JUDICIAL REVIEW IN INDIA: AN ANALYSIS OF THE CONSTITUTIONALITY
OF LAWS Written by Dr. Banamali Barik Asst. Professor in Mayurbhanj Law
College, Takatpur, Baripad
5. Judicial Review In India an Analysis Authors : Ashutosh Kumar Srivastava and Puja
Paul Srivastava
17 | P a g e
