LLM Notes: Judicial Activism and Access to Justice: A Pillar of Indian Democracy

 The concepts of judicial activism and access to justice are integral to the Indian legal system. While judicial activism ensures that the judiciary steps in to uphold constitutional values, access to justice guarantees that every individual can seek redressal of grievances irrespective of socio-economic barriers. Together, they form the bedrock of a just and equitable society.

Judicial Activism: A Catalyst for Social Change

Judicial activism refers to the proactive role played by the judiciary in interpreting laws and ensuring justice, often stepping beyond traditional boundaries to address social and constitutional issues. It acts as a corrective mechanism when the legislature or executive fails in its duties.

Key Features of Judicial Activism

1. Proactive Role: Judges interpret laws in light of changing societal needs.

2. Protection of Rights: It ensures the protection of fundamental rights and addresses legislative or executive lapses.

3. Social Engineering: Judicial activism often leads to progressive reforms, addressing issues like human rights, environmental protection, and gender equality.

Landmark Judgments on Judicial Activism

1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): This case established the "basic structure doctrine," limiting Parliament's power to amend the Constitution and safeguarding fundamental rights.

2. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): The Supreme Court expanded the scope of Article 21, emphasizing that "procedure established by law" must be fair, just, and reasonable.

3. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997): The Court laid down guidelines for preventing sexual harassment at workplaces, filling a legislative vacuum.

4. MC Mehta v. Union of India (1987): This case highlighted environmental protection through judicial intervention, mandating industries to adopt pollution control measures.

Judicial activism has been instrumental in addressing issues like custodial torture (Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration), prison reforms (Sheela Barse v. Union of India), and ensuring dignified treatment for marginalized groups.

Access to Justice: A Fundamental Right

Access to justice is a cornerstone of the rule of law, ensuring that individuals can seek remedies for grievances through an effective legal system. It encompasses both procedural fairness and substantive justice.

Essence of Access to Justice

1. Equal Opportunity: Everyone must have equal access to legal remedies, irrespective of socio-economic status.

2. Affordable Mechanisms: Legal processes should be cost-effective for all citizens.

3. Speedy Adjudication: Timely resolution of disputes is essential to prevent "justice delayed is justice denied."

4. Fair Adjudication: Courts must ensure impartiality and adherence to principles of natural justice.

Constitutional Provisions

• Article 21: Right to life includes access to justice as a fundamental right.

• Article 39-A: Mandates free legal aid for economically weaker sections.

Landmark Judgments on Access to Justice

1. Anita Kushwaha v. Pushpa Sadan (2016): The Supreme Court identified four key facets: effective adjudicatory mechanisms, reasonable accessibility, speedy adjudication, and affordability.

2. Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (1979): Highlighted the plight of undertrial prisoners and emphasized the right to a speedy trial.

3. Khatri v. State of Bihar (1981): Known as the Bhagalpur blinding case, it underscored the state's obligation to provide free legal aid.

4. State of Maharashtra v. Manubhai Pragaji Vashi (1995): Recognized legal aid as an essential element for ensuring access to justice.

Interplay Between Judicial Activism and Access to Justice

Judicial activism often bridges gaps in access to justice by addressing systemic barriers like legislative inertia or executive inefficiency:

• Public Interest Litigations (PILs) have emerged as a tool for marginalized groups to approach courts directly (SP Gupta v. Union of India).

• Environmental jurisprudence (MC Mehta cases) has ensured sustainable development while protecting citizens' rights.

• Social reforms like guidelines against sexual harassment (Vishaka case) were born out of judicial activism.

Challenges and Criticism

1. Judicial Overreach: Excessive intervention by courts may disrupt the balance among government branches.

2. Delays in Justice Delivery: Despite recognizing access as a fundamental right, judicial inefficiencies persist due to backlog and lack of resources.

3. Economic Barriers: High litigation costs still deter many from seeking remedies.

Conclusion

Judicial activism and access to justice are complementary forces that uphold democracy and constitutional values in India. While judicial activism ensures accountability across government branches, access to justice guarantees inclusivity in legal processes. Together, they reinforce public faith in the judiciary as a guardian of rights and liberties.

As India advances, addressing challenges like judicial delays and economic barriers will be crucial for realizing the full potential of these principles in ensuring justice for all citizens.

Print Page