Judicial Review and Article 142: Role of the Supreme Court
Why in the news
The Supreme Court’s use of judicial review and Article 142 triggered a national debate on how the three organs of the state should balance one another.
Judicial review
- Not named in the Constitution but implied by Article 13, which voids laws that violate fundamental rights.
- Backed by Article 32 (Supreme Court) and Article 226 (High Courts).
- Part of the basic structure, ensuring rule of law and constitutional supremacy.
| Concept | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Judicial review | Testing the constitutionality of laws |
| Judicial activism | Proactive judicial role where legislative or executive gaps exist; best kept for extraordinary situations |
| PIL | Grew after the Emergency to restore legitimacy and give voice to the marginalised, such as prisoners, workers and custodial violence victims |
Article 142
- Enables complete justice beyond statutory limits; once called a “nuclear missile”.
- Invoked in the Babri Masjid case, lynching guidelines and marriage breakdown matters.
- Restraint is advised to protect institutional integrity.
Accountability debate
- Critics call the Court pro-government in cases on demonetisation, Article 370, Rafale, NRC, CAA and EVMs.
- Rulings against the government include Electoral Bonds, NJAC and Arunachal Pradesh President’s Rule.
- Judiciary tends to prefer peace in sensitive matters such as Article 370, Babri Masjid and the Places of Worship Act.
Landmark observations
- Krishna Iyer (1981): powers must not be exercised out of vanity.
- Qaiser-e-Hind (2001): assent by the President is a constitutional act and not a mere formality.
- 2025 Tamil Nadu verdict: suggested timelines only secure reasonable functioning; the Constitution is not amended.
Way forward
- All organs must stay within constitutional limits, including the President and Governors.
- Criticism of the judiciary should be fair, not disparaging.
Exam angle
- Articles: 13, 32, 226, 142.
- Judicial review forms part of the basic structure.