Judicial Activism in India 2025: Shaping Justice and Democracy

Introduction

Judicial activism in India has emerged as a cornerstone of democracy, ensuring justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity as enshrined in the Indian Constitution. In 2025, with the evolving legal landscape, the role of judicial activism remains a trending topic in law and governance. This article explores the definition, historical background, methods, importance, criticisms, and the balance with judicial restraint—key aspects that shape its influence on modern Indian society.

What is Judicial Activism?

Judicial activism refers to a proactive role of the judiciary in preserving the constitutional and legal system of a country. In India, it involves judges interpreting and applying the law in ways that go beyond the literal text of legal statutes or precedents. This approach allows the judiciary to address gaps left by the legislature and executive, making it a vital tool for social justice in 2025.

Historical Background of Judicial Activism

The concept of judicial activism originated in the United States, notably with Justice Arthur Schlesinger Jr.'s article titled "The Supreme Court, 1947." In India, this philosophy gained momentum through landmark judgments by Justices P.N. Bhagwati, V.R. Krishna Iyer, and D. Chinnappa Reddy. Their contributions have shaped judicial activism into a powerful mechanism for upholding constitutional values.

Methods of Judicial Activism

1. Public Interest Litigation (PIL): A trending legal tool , PIL allows citizens to seek justice on public issues.
2. Judicial Review (Article-137): Ensures laws align with constitutional provisions.
3. Constitutional Interpretation: Expands the scope of rights and duties.
4. Judicial Precedents: Builds on past rulings to address current challenges.
5. Expanding the Scope of Existing Laws: Adapts legislation to modern needs, such as abolishing bonded labor or fixing liability in hazardous industries.

Importance of Judicial Activism in 2025 Judicial activism plays a pivotal role in contemporary India:

- Broad Interpretation of Constitutional provisions : Example- Expanding the scope of Article 21 in the case of Maneka Gandhi v Union Of India, 1978 .
- Protecting Individual Rights: Safeguards minority rights and fundamental freedoms.
- Promoting Social Justice: Addresses social issues like custodial deaths and prisoners' rights.
- Strengthening Democracy: Enhances government accountability.
- Improving Governance: Boosts administrative efficiency and public faith in the judiciary.

Case Laws Shaping Judicial Activism

Key cases include:
1. Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967): Established the judiciary's role in protecting constitutional provisions.
2. Kesavananda Bharti v. State of Kerala (1973): Introduced the basic structure doctrine.
3. Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Shri Raj Narain & Anr on 7 November, 1975: Reinforced judicial oversight.
4. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan & Ors on 13 August, 1997: Expanded workplace safety laws.
5. Shayara Bano v. Union of India 2017: Highlighted progressive judicial intervention.

Criticism of Judicial Activism

Despite its benefits, judicial activism faces criticism:
- Supremacy Conflict: Creates tension between Parliament and Supreme Courts.
- Power Imbalance: May disturb the separation of powers and checks and balances.
- Undermining Democracy: Critics argue it allows unelected judges to influence policy, challenging elected representatives.

Judicial Restraint:
-Judicial Restraint is the antithesis of Judicial Activism.
-Judicial Restraint is a theory of judicial interpretation that encourages judges to limit the exercise of their own power.
-In short, the courts should interpret the law and not intervene in policy-making.

Judges should always try to decide cases on the basis of:
(1) The original intent of those who wrote the constitution
(2) Precedent- past decisions in earlier cases.
(3) Also, the court should leave policy making to others.

Here, courts "restrain" themselves from setting new policies with their decisions.

Solution:

-Striking the Right Balance - Foster a culture of dialogue between the judiciary, legislature, and executive.
- Make legislators and the judiciary more accountable to the people.
- Encourage courts to leave policy-making to others while upholding justice.

Conclusion
In India, judicial activism has played an active role in promoting justice, upholding the rule of law, and safeguarding citizens' rights in 2025. The Supreme Court and High Courts have worked tirelessly to support progressive social policies. However, maintaining the principle of separation of powers remains crucial. The judiciary should remain cautious, stepping into spheres of activity only when necessary, ensuring a balanced and thriving democracy.

References

1) https://www.drishtiias.com/to-the-points/Paper2/judicial-activism-restraint-overreach (Drishti Judiciary)
2)https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/judicial_activism (legal Information Institute )
3) https://www.britannica.com/topic/judicial-activism (Britannica)