In India, Judicial Review implies
Contents11
- Athe power of the Judiciary to pronounce upon the constitutionality of laws and executive orders.
- Bthe power of the Judiciary to question the wisdom of the laws enacted by the Legislatures.
- Cthe power of the Judiciary to review all the legislative enactments before they are assented to by the President.
- Dthe power of the Judiciary to review its own judgements given earlier in similar or different cases.
Show answer
Answer: (A) the power of the Judiciary to pronounce upon the constitutionality of laws and executive orders.
Judicial review is the power of the judiciary to examine the constitutionality of legislative enactments (laws passed by Parliament/State Legislatures) and executive orders of both the Central and State governments.
If a law or executive order is found to violate the Constitution (i.e., is ultra vires or beyond the power granted), the court can declare it illegal, unconstitutional, and void — meaning the government cannot enforce it.
The constitutional validity of a law can be challenged on three grounds:
- (a) it infringes Fundamental Rights (Part III),
- (b) it is outside the competence of the authority that made it (e.g., a state legislature making a law on a Union List subject), or
- (c) it is repugnant to constitutional provisions.
Option (b) is wrong: Judicial review is NOT about questioning the 'wisdom' or 'merit' of a law.
Courts do not judge whether a law is good policy or bad policy — they only check whether it is constitutionally valid. This is an important distinction.
Option (c) is wrong: Courts do NOT review all legislative enactments BEFORE they receive Presidential assent.
Judicial review happens AFTER a law is enacted, usually when someone challenges it in court.
India does not have a system of pre-legislative judicial review.
Option (d) is wrong: Reviewing earlier judgements is called 'review jurisdiction' or 'curative petition', which is different from 'judicial review'.
(Source: Laxmikant, Chapter on High Court and Supreme Court)
Judicial review allows courts to strike down any law or government action that violates the Constitution, making it the most powerful check on legislative and executive authority.
The key trap is distinguishing between reviewing constitutionality versus reviewing wisdom - courts check if laws are constitutional, not whether they are good policy decisions.
Judicial Review: Definition & Scope
Indian Polity Judicial Review constitutionality legislative enactments executive orders
Judicial Review: Power to Test Constitutional Validity
Judicial Review = power to examine constitutionality of laws and executive orders
Courts can declare laws void if they violate the Constitution
Review happens AFTER law is enacted, not before Presidential assent
Courts check constitutional validity, NOT policy wisdom
What is Judicial Review
Judicial Review is the judiciary's power to examine whether laws passed by Parliament/State Legislatures and executive orders issued by governments conform to the Constitution. If found ultra vires (beyond constitutional authority), courts declare them illegal and void.
Judicial Review vs Other Powers
Power | What it Reviews | When it Happens | Focus |
|---|---|---|---|
Judicial Review | Laws & executive orders | After enactment when challenged | Constitutional validity |
Legislative Scrutiny | Bills & proposals | Before passing | Policy merit & feasibility |
Review Jurisdiction | Court's own judgements | After final judgement | Errors in earlier orders |
Three Grounds for Challenge
Fundamental Rights violation — law infringes Part III rights of citizens
Legislative competence — authority exceeded its constitutional power (e.g., state law on Union List subject)
Repugnancy to Constitution — law contradicts any constitutional provision or principle
What Judicial Review is NOT
Indian Polity wisdom of the laws review all legislative enactments review its own judgements
Judicial Review Limitations: Common UPSC Traps
Courts do NOT judge policy wisdom — only constitutional validity
No pre-legislative review — courts act only after laws are challenged
Reviewing own judgements is different power — called review jurisdiction
What Courts Can vs Cannot Do
Courts CAN | Courts CANNOT | Reasoning |
|---|---|---|
Check if law violates Constitution | Judge if law is good policy | Separation of powers — policy is Legislature's domain |
Review laws after someone challenges | Review all laws before Presidential assent | India has no pre-legislative judicial review system |
Declare laws void if unconstitutional | Question wisdom of constitutional laws | Merits vs validity are different standards |
Trap: Option B confuses policy wisdom with constitutional validity — courts don't judge merit
Trap: Option C suggests pre-legislative review — India reviews laws only AFTER enactment when challenged
Trap: Option D mixes judicial review with review jurisdiction (curative petitions) — different concepts
How Judicial Review Works in India
Indian Polity
Judicial Review Process: When & How Laws Get Challenged
Any person affected can challenge laws in High Court or Supreme Court
Article 13 makes laws violating Fundamental Rights void
Constitutional validity decided by larger benches for consistency
Judicial Review Process
%%{init: {"flowchart": {"wrappingWidth": 460}}}%%
flowchart TD
s1["`**Law/Order Enacted**
Parliament/State Legislature passes law OR Government issues executive order`"]
s2["`**Challenge Filed**
Affected person files petition in High Court/Supreme Court claiming constitutional violation`"]
s3["`**Court Examination**
Court examines law against Constitution — Fundamental Rights, legislative competence, other provisions`"]
s4["`**Judgement**
If constitutional = law stands; If unconstitutional = law declared **void** and unenforceable`"]
s1 --> s2
s2 --> s3
s3 --> s4Constitutional Foundation
Article 13(2) — 'State shall not make any law which takes away or abridges Fundamental Rights'
Article 32 & 226 — Supreme Court and High Courts can issue writs against unconstitutional laws
Implied power — though not explicitly mentioned, judicial review flows from Constitution being supreme law
Judicial Powers: Review vs Revision vs Appeal
Indian Polity
Different Types of Judicial Powers: Clear Distinctions
Judicial Review = testing laws against Constitution
Review Jurisdiction = court reviewing its own earlier judgements
Appellate Jurisdiction = hearing appeals from lower courts
Types of Judicial Powers
Power Type | What it Reviews | Against Whom | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
Judicial Review | Laws & executive orders | Legislature/Executive | Striking down Section 66A of IT Act |
Review Jurisdiction | Court's own judgements | Court's earlier decision | Curative petitions in exceptional cases |
Appellate Jurisdiction | Lower court decisions | Trial court/tribunal | Criminal/civil appeals to High Court/SC |
Original Jurisdiction | Disputes directly filed | States/persons | Inter-state disputes directly in SC |
Never confuse: Judicial review (testing laws) vs Review jurisdiction (reviewing own judgements)
Key distinction: Constitutional validity vs policy merit — courts only check the former