Judicial Activism — the Enforcement of Human Rights in India

Authors

  • Dr. K. R. Aithal Professor of Law, Karnatak University, Dharwad -580001, Karnataka

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.60143/ijls.v1.i1.2015.11

Keywords:

judicial activism, fundamental rights, locus standing, PIL.

Abstract

The most conspicuous feature of the Indian legal system is judicial activism and almost institutionalization of government by the judiciary. This activism is often assisted by activist lawyers, social activists, journalists and several others. The Supreme Court of India through innovative exercise of judicial power was fairly successful in protecting and promoting human rights and this process of creative exercise of judicial power is termed as judicial activism. The means and methods by which the judiciary expands its role is through public interest litigation (PIL). This paper is aimed at incisive analysis of judicial activism and PIL in promoting human rights of the weak and the vulnerable.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2023-08-10

How to Cite

Aithal, D. K. R. (2023). Judicial Activism — the Enforcement of Human Rights in India. International Journal of Law and Social Sciences, 1(1), 60–75. https://doi.org/10.60143/ijls.v1.i1.2015.11

Issue

Volume 1, Issue 1, 2015

Section

Articles

License

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

M. Capelleti, Judicial Process in Comparative Perspective, (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1989) p.4. Sir Garfield Barwikh, “Judiciary Law: Some Observations thereon”, 33 Current Legal Problems 241 (1980). Arther S. Miller, Judicial Activism and American Constitutionalism: Some Notes and Reflections, in J.R. Pennock and J.W. Chapman (eds.) Constitutionalism NOMOS, Vol.XX, (New York: New York University Press, 1979), p.333.

Micheal J.Perry, The Constitution, the Courts and Human Rights, (New Delhi: Willey Eastern Ltd, 1982) pp 9-36.

Lord Devlin, Judges as Law Makers, 39 MLR 1, 16 (1976).

Upendra Baxi, “Taking Suffering Seriously; Social Action Litigation in the Supreme Court of India”, in Upendra Baxi (ed.) Law and Poverty: Critical Essays (Bombay: N.M. Tripathi, 1988) pp 388-89.

Id, at 390.

Upendra Baxi, “Judicial Activism: Usurpations or Re Democratization”, in Jagga Kapur (ed.) Supreme Court on Public Interest Litigation, Vol.3 (New Delhi: LIPS Publication, 1999) pp A-131-144.

Ibid.

Id, at 133.

Kameshwar Singh Vs. State of Bihar, AIR 1952 SC 252.

State of Madras Vs. Champakam Dorairajan, AIR 1951 SC 226.

Upendra Baxi, “Judicial Activism: Usurpation or Re-democratization?”, in Jagga Kapur (ed.) Supreme Court on Public Interest Litigation (New Delhi: LIPs Publication, 1991)., Vol.1 A 132-133.

Hidayatullah, Right to Property and the Indian Constitution (Calcutta: Calcutta University Press, 1983) 143.

Ibid.

Keshavananda Bharathi Vs. State Kerala, AIR 1973 SC 1461.

Supra n.4, at 386.

Ibid.

Hussainara Khatoon Vs. Home Secretary, Bihar AIR 1979 SC 1360.

Supra, no.4, A-91.

Ibid.

Bandhua Mukti Morcha Vs. Union of India, AIR 1992 SC 38.

Supra, n.4, at A133.

Supra; n.4 at A98.

P.N. Bhagwathi, “Judicial Activism and Public Interest Litigation” 23 Cohem J of Trans mat L; 561 (1985).

AIR 1986 SC 180.

Supra; n.4 at 390.

Bill No. 53 of 1996 - The Public Interest Litigation (Regulation) Bill 1996 was introduced and was also allowed to lapse for details see supra n.6 at A131-144.

AIR 1987 SC 579.

AIR 1993 SC 136.

AIR 2006 SC 232.

(1997) SCC 444.

AIR 1998 SC 889.

AIR 2006 SC 232.

N.R. Madhaw Menon, “Public Interest Litigation: A Major break Through in the Delivery of Social Justice”, 9 7. B.C. 1 150 (1982).

Ibid.

Supra no. 4 at p.388.

Rajeev Dhavan, “Law as struggle: Public Interest Litigation in India”, 30 JILI. 306-307 (1994).

Supra n.23 at 150.

Supra n.17 at 1360.

AIR 1992 SC 38.

(184) 3 SCC 243.

Ibid.

AIR 1992 SC 38.

AIR 1992 SC 38.

(1996) 6 SCC 756.

S.P. Gupta Vs. Union of India, AIR 1982 SC 149.

Id, at 252.

Peoples Union for Democratic Rights Vs. Unon of India, AIR 1982 SC 1473 at 189.

Jarmie Cassels, “Judicial Activism and Public Interest Litigations in India: Attempting the impossible”, 378 Am. J. Comp. Law 502 (1989).

Ibid.

AIR 1982 SC 149.

Ibid.

AIR 1992 38.

Supra n.34 at 526.

Special Leave petition No.2785/79 quoted from S.K. Agarwale, Public Interest Litigation: A Critique (Bombay: N.M. Tripathy 1985, p.14).

Janatha Dal Vs. H.S. Choudary (1992) 1 SCC 307.

Clark D. Cunningham, “Public Interest Litigation in Indian Supreme Court: A study in the light of American Experience”, 28 Journal of Indian Law Institute 494 (1987).

Ibid

Abraham Chayes, The Role of Judges in Public Law Litigation, 89 Harv. Law Rev. 1281, 1284 (1976).

Ibid.

Hussainara Khatoon Vs. State of Bhhar (1980) 1 SCC 81.

Khatri Vs. State of Bihar, AIR 1981 SC 928.

(1985 3 SCC 545).

AIR (1983(SC 126)).

Supra n.6 at 143.

(1985) 3 SCC 545.

Olga Tellis Vs. Bombay Municipality (1985) 3 SCC 545.

Rajeev Dhawan, “Law as struggle: Public Interest Litigation in India”, 36 JILI 306-301 (1994).

Ibid.

P.N. Bhagwati, “Judicial Activism and Public Interest Litigation,” 23 Colum. J. of Transnational Law, 561 (1985).

Sheela Barse Vs. State of Maharashtra, 1983 AIR SC 126.

AIR 1992 SC 38.

AIR 1992 SC 38, 136.

Gaurau Jain Vs. Union of India, (1997) 8 SCC 114.

Upendra Baxi, The Avtars of Indian Judicial Activism: Explorations in the Geographies of(in) Justice, in ILI (ed). Fifty Years of the Supreme Court (Delhi: Indian Law Institute, 2005) 156-209.

Id, at 172.

Id, at 182.

Ibid.

Id, at 186.

Vishaka Vs. State Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011.

A.R. Antule Vs. S.R. Nayak, AIR 1988 SC 1531.