Judicial Review and Judicial Activism-FAQs
Who holds the charge of judicial review?
In India, the authority to conduct judicial reviews rests with the Supreme Court and the High Courts.
What justifications exist for judicial review?
The main justifications for requesting a judicial review include mistakes in jurisdiction, irregularities in the procedure, irrationality in the decision, and reasonable expectations.
What is an example of judicial review?
Section 66A of the IT Act of 2000 was struck down as, on review, it turned out that the act was against the Fundamental Rights under the Indian Constitution and hence struck down.
What is the difference between judicial activism and judicial overeach?
Judicial activism urges the judiciary to take a more assertive role in protecting and upholding people’s rights, whereas judicial excess pushes for more restraint on the court’s authority.
What are some examples of judicial activism?
Creation of the “basic structure doctrine” in the 1973 “Keshavanad Bharati case,” which allowed the Supreme Court to further expand the reach of judicial review; adoption of the collegium system; institutionalization of PIL; and prohibition of smoking in public areas based on PIL.
Also refer to:
Difference between Criminal Law and Civil Law
Difference between Public Law and Private Law
Difference between Policy and Law
Difference between Judicial Review and Judicial Activism
Judicial Review and Judicial Activism are the two core ideas in the field of justice. Though their goals, strategies, and ramifications are different, both are crucial in forming the legal system. This comparative research examines the distinctions between judicial review and judicial activism, emphasizing the roles, circumstances, and outcomes of both in the political and legal spheres.
Table of Content
- What is Judicial Review?
- What is Judicial Activism?
- Difference between Judicial Review and Judicial Activism
- Conclusion
- Difference between Judicial Review and Judicial Activism-FAQs