Judicial Review vs. Judicial Overreach: Recent Examples from Supreme Court Decisions

The supreme court of india stands as the guardian of the constitution, empowered to strike down laws or executive actions that violate fundamental rights or exceed constitutional limits. This power, known as judicial review, is a cornerstone of India's democratic structure. However, when the judiciary is perceived to step into the policy-making domain or override the mandate of elected bodies, it is often accused of judicial overreach.

This article explores the fine line between judicial review and overreach, with reference to recent Supreme Court decisions post-2020, relevant constitutional provisions, and public reactions.

Understanding the Concepts

  • Judicial Review: The authority of courts to examine the constitutionality of legislative or executive actions. Rooted in Articles 13, 32, 131–136, and 226 of the Constitution.
     
  • Judicial Overreach: When courts are seen to legislateadminister, or make decisions that lie beyond their constitutional mandate, infringing upon the separation of powers.

Recent Cases Reflecting Judicial Review

1. Electoral Bonds Scheme (2024)

  • The Supreme Court struck down the anonymous funding model for political parties.
     
  • Upheld Article 19(1)(a) (right to information) and transparency in democracy.
     
  • Widely seen as a legitimate exercise of judicial review to protect citizens’ constitutional rights.

2. Demonetisation Judgment (2023)

  • The Court upheld the government’s 2016 demonetisation move.
     
  • Despite criticism, the majority judgment deferred to the executive’s economic policy domain.
     
  • Seen as judicial restraint, not overreach—reaffirming separation of powers.

3. PMLA Verdict on Bail Provisions (2022)

  • The SC upheld stringent bail conditions under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.
     
  • Critics argue the Court didn’t adequately test these provisions against Article 21 (right to personal liberty).
     
  • Some legal scholars viewed it as judicial underreach, where the Court failed to review executive excess.

Recent Cases Raising Questions of Judicial Overreach

1. Firecracker Ban and Pollution Control

  • The SC imposed wide-ranging bans on sale and use of firecrackers to control pollution.
     
  • While based on Article 21 (right to clean environment), critics argued that enforcement decisions should rest with local/state governments and pollution control boards.

2. Directions on COVID-19 Vaccine Pricing and Distribution

  • In 2021, the SC asked detailed questions and passed directions on vaccine procurement and pricing strategy.
     
  • Though well-intentioned, some viewed it as the judiciary micro-managing policy during a public health crisis.

3. BCCI and Cricket Administration Case

  • In earlier years but cited in 2020s as precedent, SC restructured the cricket board and appointed a committee.
     
  • Legal commentators often cite this case as blurring the line between judicial intervention and administrative overreach.

Legal Framework and Constitutional Provisions

  • Article 13 – Judicial review of laws inconsistent with fundamental rights.
     
  • Article 32 & 226 – Empower the SC and HCs to enforce rights through writ jurisdiction.
     
  • Article 142 – Power to do complete justice, often used in contentious judgments.
     
  • Doctrine of Separation of Powers – While not explicitly stated, is implied in the Constitution and upheld in Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973).

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s role in defending constitutional values through judicial review is vital to maintaining the rule of law. However, the line between ensuring justice and entering the policy domain is delicate. In recent years, the judiciary has shown moments of both careful restraint and assertive activism.

Whether an action constitutes judicial review or overreach often depends on perspective—what some call overreach, others view as judicial courage. What remains essential is that all three organs of government—legislature, executive, and judiciary—operate in mutual respect, with the Constitution as the ultimate guide.

LEAVE A COMMENT

0 comments