JUDICIAL ACTIVISM

When we talk about the judicial activism so the concept of judicial activism originated and developed in the USA. The  term was first coined in 1947  by Arthur Schlesinger jr , an  American historian and educator.

if we talk about judicial activism in India so this  doctrine was introduced in mid 1970s .

justice P.N BHAGWATI , JUSTICE O. CHINNAPPA REDDY AND JUSTICE D.A DESAI  laid the foundation of judicial activism in the country .

 MEANING 

When we talk about the meaning of judicial activism so it denotes the proactive role played by the judiciary in the protection of the right of the citizens and in the promotion of justice in the society .

we can say that judiciary is that part who played an assertive role  who can force the other two organs of the government to discharge their  duties .

1. judicial activism is a way of exercising judicial power  that motivate judges to depart from normally practised  strict adherence to judicial precedent in favour of progressive and new social precedent in favour of progressive and new social policies .     It is commonly marked by decision calling for social engineering , and occasionally these decision represent intrusion in the legislative and the executive matter.

2. Judicial activism is the practice in the judiciary of protecting and expanding individuals right through decision that depart from established precedent or are independent of , or in opposition to supposed constitutional or legislation intent .

the concept of judicial activism is like public interest litigation which is introduced by justice p.n Bhagwati.it is the judicial activism of the supreme court  which is the major factor of rising the PIL. In other word PIL is outcome of judicial activism  infact PIL is the most popular form of judicial activism .

JUDICIAL ACTIVISM IN INDIA 

When we talk about the judicial activism in India so Supreme court is in  the highest   position as the guardian of the constitution  we can call India's judiciary  independent and integrated .

since independence judiciary has played a vital role to dispensing justice e.g A.K GOPALAN VS SATE OF MADRAS 1950 by the shankari prasad case .However the judiciary remained submissive untile1960 but it is assertiveness started in 1973  when Allahabad high court rejected the candidature of INDIRA GANDHI . The introduction of public interest litigation by JUSTICE VR . KRISHNA IYER further explained it scope .

 PIL 

India has a recent history of  judicial activism .originating after the emergency in India in 1975  when government attempt to control the judiciary .public interest litigation was thus an instrument devised  by the court to reach out directly to the public and take cognizance though the litigant may not the victim  

"suo motu " cognizance allow the court to take up such cases on its own  the trend has been supported as well criticized all such ruling carry the force of article 39 of the Indian constitution   India although

before and during the emergency the judiciary desisted from "wide and elastic "interpretation because directive principle of state policy are non -justiciable 

This despite the constitutional provision for judicial review and B.R AMBEDKAR arguing in the constitution assembly writ jurisdiction , could provide quick relief against abridgment of fundamental rights and ought to be at the heart of the constitution (article32)

ARTICLE 142:     Article 142 provide that "the supreme court in the exercise of its jurisdiction may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause of matter  pending before it and may decree so passed or order so made shall be enforceable throughout the territory in India in such manner as may be prescribed by or under any law made by parliament and , until provision in that behalf is so made , in such manner as the president may by order 

 activism can be either conservative or liberal …..

conservative tends to narrow the scope of interpretation to restrict government or individuals right 

liberal activism tends to broaden the scope of interpretation to expand individual rights in keeping with progressive social reforms.

case laws ROMESH THAPPER V STATE OF MADRAS ,CHAMPAKAM DORAJRAJAN  VS STATE OF MADRAS invalidating the laws passed by the parliament forced the parliament to pass 1st amendment act 1951 which added 9th schedule to the constitution .

KHARAK SINGH CASE 1962.... It was the first case of judicial activism on the right to liberty SC held that "personal liberty "was not only limited to bodily restraint or confinement to person only but something more than mere animal existence . it extends to all those limits and faculties by which life is enjoy 

shankari prasad case 1951 , golaknath case 1950 keshvanand bharti case 1973 some other landmark judgment which shows judicial activism in our judiciary .