In a number of cases, the Supreme Court has pointed out the significance of the power of judicial review in our country.
Important Cases regarding Judicial Review
Some observations made by the Supreme Court, in regard to the significance of judicial review, are:
A K Gopalan Vs State of Madras (1950)
Chief Justice Kania held that “In India, it is the Constitution that is supreme and that a statute law to be valid, must be in conformity with the constitutional requirements, and it is for the judiciary to decide whether any enactment is constitutional or not”.
Kesavananda Bharati Vs State of Kerala (1973)
Justice Khanna held that “As long as some Fundamental Rights exist and are a part of the Constitution, the power of judicial review has also to be exercised with a view to see that the guarantees afforded by these rights are not contravened”.
Minerva Mills Vs Union of India (1980)
Chief Justice Chandrachud held that “It is the function of the Judges, may their duty, to pronounce upon the validity of laws. If courts are totally deprived of that power, the Fundamental Rights conferred on the people will become a mere adornment because rights without remedies are as writ in water. A controlled Constitution will then become uncontrolled”.
S S Bola Vs B D Sharma (1997)
Justice Ramaswami held that “The founding fathers very wisely, therefore, incorporated in the Constitution itself the provisions of judicial review so as to maintain the balance of federalism, to protect the Fundamental Rights and Fundamental Freedoms guaranteed to the citizens and to afford a useful weapon for availability, availment and enjoyment of equality, liberty and Fundamental Freedoms and to help to create a healthy nationalism. The function of judicial review is a part of the constitutional interpretation itself. It adjusts the Constitution to meet new conditions and needs of the time”.
Further Reading:
To read more 25 Important Supreme Court Judgements, aspirants can check the linked article.
|
Related Links |
|
Comments