Introduction 

Judicial activism signifies the proactive role of the Judiciary in protecting the rights of citizens. In India, the Supreme Court and the High courts are vested with the power to examine the constitutionality of any law, and if such a law is found to be inconsistent with the provisions of the constitution, the court can declare the law as unconstitutional. 

• It has to be noted that the subordinate courts do not have the power to review the constitutionality of laws. 

Origin of Judicial Activism 

• The concept of judicial activism originated and developed in the USA.  
• This term was first coined in 1947 by Arthur Schlesinger Jr., an American historian and educator.  
• In India, the foundation of Judicial Activism in India was laid down by Justice V.R Krishna Iyer, Justice P. N Bhagwati, Justice O.Chinnappa Reddy, and Justice D.A Desai. 

Meaning of Judicial Activism  

• Judicial activism denotes the proactive role played by the judiciary in the protection of the rights of citizens and in the promotion of justice in the society.  
• In other words, it implies the assertive role played by the judiciary to force the other two organs of the government (legislature and executive) to discharge their constitutional duties. 

Necessity of Judicial Activism 

To understand the increased role of the judiciary, it is important to know the causes that led to the judiciary playing an active role. 

• There was rampant corruption in other organs of government. 
• The executive became callous in its work and failed to deliver the results required. 
• Parliament became ignorant of its legislative duties. 
• The principles of democracy were continuously degrading. 
• Public Interest Litigations brought forward the urgency of public issues. 

In such a scenario, the judiciary was forced to play an active role. It was possible only through an institution like judiciary which is vested with powers to correct the various wrongs in society. In order to prevent the compromise of democracy, the Supreme Court and High Courts took the responsibility of solving these problems. 

Rise of Judicial Activism 

• Judicial activism has arisen mainly due to: 
  • The failure of the executive and legislatures to act. 
  • Since there is a doubt that the legislature and executive have failed to deliver the desired results. 
  • It occurs because the entire system has been plagued by ineffectiveness and inactiveness. 
  • The violation of basic human rights has also led to judicial activism. 
  • Due to the misuse and abuse of some of the provisions of the Constitution, judicial activism has gained importance. 

Criticism of Judicial Activism 

• Judicial Activism has led to a controversy in regard to the supremacy between Parliament and Supreme Courts. 
• It can disturb the delicate principle of separation of powers and checks and balances. 

Case Laws 

• Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru and Ors. v. State of Kerala (1973): The apex court of India declared that the executive had no right to intercede and tamper with the basic structure of the constitution. 
• Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra (1983): A letter by Journalist, addressed to the Supreme Court addressing the custodial violence of women prisoners in Jail. The court treated that letter as a writ petition and took cognizance of that matter. 
• I. C. Golaknath & Ors. v. State of Punjab & Anr. (1967): The Supreme Court declared that Fundamental Rights enshrined in Part 3 are immune and cannot be amended by the legislative assembly. 
• Hussainara Khatoon (I) v. State of Bihar (1979): The inhuman and barbaric conditions of the undertrial prisoners reflected through the articles published in the newspaper. Under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (COI), the apex court accepted it and held that the right to speedy trial is a fundamental right. 
• A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950): The Supreme Court rejected the argument that to deprive a person of his life or liberty not only the procedure prescribed by law for doing so must be followed but also that such procedure must be fair, reasonable and just.