Write a critical note on 'Judicial Activism'.

Critical Note on 'Judicial Activism' in India

Judicial Activism (न्यायिक सक्रियता) refers to the assertive and proactive role played by the higher judiciary (Supreme Court and High Courts) to protect citizens' fundamental rights, promote social justice, and force executive/legislative accountability when state machinery fails.

1. Drivers and Manifestations of Judicial Activism:

• 1. Public Interest Litigation (PIL / जनहित याचिका): Pioneered by Justices P.N. Bhagwati and V.R. Krishna Iyer, relaxing the rule of Locus Standi to allow public-spirited citizens to seek justice for the marginalized.
• 2. Expansion of Article 21 (Right to Life): Interpreting 'life' to include right to clean environment (MC Mehta), right to privacy (Puttaswamy), right to livelihood (Olga Tellis), and right to education.
• 3. Filling Legislative Vacuums: Framing binding operational guidelines in the absence of legislation (e.g., Vishaka Guidelines on workplace sexual harassment; Prakash Singh Guidelines on police reforms).

2. Critical Concerns — The Thin Line to 'Judicial Overreach':

• 1. Breach of Separation of Powers (Art. 50): Entering pure policy, executive governance, and taxation domains (e.g., banning liquor along highways, managing cricket board).
• 2. Lack of Expertise & Accountability: Judiciary lacks administrative infrastructure and fiscal resources to enforce complex techno-economic policies.
• 3. Increasing Case Backlogs: Excessive involvement in administrative PILs distracts courts from clearing millions of pending civil and criminal cases.

Conclusion: Judicial activism is a vital constitutional shield against executive tyranny, but must remain tempered with Judicial Restraint (न्यायिक संयम).