Judicial Excess, Parliamentary Distress: The Rise Of Judicial Activism In India
Amity Law School, New Delhi
Republic of India, a former British colony has always taken pride in in its idea of Parliamentary sovereignty which can be deeply imbibed through the roots of its constitution. However, the recent trends indicating the upsurge in judicial ascendancy reflect otherwise. A landmark example of judicial perusal to perforate the dominion of “exclusivity” relished by the parliament was that of Keshavananda Bharti, wherein the Supreme Court of India in toto stated that the executive had no right to alter the fundamental provisions of the constitution. A one of its kind judgement, it received immense criticism from both the Parliament as well as a large section of judicial experts for its undue trial to limit the Parliamentary freedoms. Another disturbing instance of the court’s unruly intervention was the Jharkhand legislative Assembly case, wherein the Supreme Court ordered the Assembly to conduct a motion of confidence and directed the Speaker to function according to the prescribed agenda. This paper aims to provide a critical analysis of the origin and proliferation of judicial activism in India and the extent to which it is justified under the ambit of “Larger Public interest”.