JUDICIAL REVIEW: EXPLORING THE ROLE OF THE JUDICIARY IN CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION
THE LAWWAY WITH LAWYERS JOURNAL VOLUME:-25 ISSUE NO:- 25 ,JULY 25, 2025 ISSN (ONLINE):- 2584-1106 Website: www.the lawway with lawyers.com Email: thelawwaywithelawyers@gmail.com Authored By :- Jayashree. S JUDICIAL REVIEW: EXPLORING THE ROLE OF THE JUDICIARY IN CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION ABSTRACT: Judicial review is a main mechanism through which the judiciary interprets and enforces the Constitution, ensuring that legislative and executive actions conform to constitutional mandates. This power acts as a major check on the other branches of government, safeguarding the supremacy of the Constitution and protecting fundamental rights. The Indian judiciary, through landmark judgments and evolving interpretive methods, has shaped the doctrine of judicial review to balance constitutional stability with flexibility. The concept of the “basic structure” doctrine further reinforces the judiciary’s role in preserving the core values of the Constitution against arbitrary amendments. This paper explores the role of judicial review in constitutional interpretation, its constitutional basis, landmark judgments, and its impact on Indian democracy and governance. KEYWORDS: Judicial Review, Constitutional Interpretation, Basic Structure Doctrine, Constitutional Supremacy, Landmark Judgments, Rule of Law. INTRODUCTION: Judicial review refers to the power of the judiciary to examine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions and to invalidate those that are inconsistent with the Constitution. In India, this authority is vested in the Supreme Court and the High Courts, as provided by several constitutional provisions, including Articles 13, 32, and 226. Judicial review gives a fundamental check and balance within the framework of separation of powers, ensuring that the actions of the legislature and executive binding to the supreme law of the land – The Constitution. This process allows the judiciary to act as the guardian of the Constitution and the protector of citizens’ rights. Judicial review is not only central to upholding fundamental rights but also to maintaining the rule of law and preventing arbitrary governance. The doctrine, though inspired by the United States, has been uniquely adapted to suit India’s constitutional context and societal needs. Over time, judicial review has evolved into a cornerstone of Indian democracy, with courts empowered to strike down any law, ordinance, order, or executive action that violates constitutional principles or the basic structure of the Constitution. Judicial review is the judiciary’s mechanism for supervising the actions of the other branches of government, legitimizing government action, and safeguarding the Constitution from arbitrary powers. HISTORICAL EVOLUTION OF JUDICIAL REVIEW IN INDIA: The historical evolution of judicial review in India is marked by a gradual development influenced by ancient legal traditions, colonial experience, and constitutional design. Ancient and Colonial Roots: While ancient Indian legal traditions emphasized the rule of law and judicial impartiality, a formal doctrine of judicial review did not exist. The concept began to take shape under British colonial rule, where courts were empowered to interpret laws and ensure they conformed to statutory and constitutional limits. Notable cases such as Emperor v. Burrah (1877) and Annie Besant v. Government of Madras (1918) established that laws exceeding the authority granted by the British Parliament could be declared void. Constitutional Framing: After independence, the framers of the Indian Constitution explicitly incorporated judicial review, drawing inspiration from both the British and American systems. The Constitution, adopted in 1950, vested the Supreme Court and High Courts with the authority to review legislative and executive actions for constitutional compliance, particularly through Articles 13, 32, and 226. Early Judicial Pronouncements: The Supreme Court first asserted its power of judicial review in Shankari Prasad v. Union of India (1951), addressing the scope of Parliament’s amending powers. This was further clarified in Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967), where the Court held that Parliament could not amend Fundamental Rights—a decision later reversed by the 24th Amendment. Basic Structure Doctrine: The landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) fundamentally shaped the doctrine of judicial review in India. The Supreme Court ruled that Parliament’s amending power was limited by the “basic structure” of the Constitution, which could not be altered or destroyed. This doctrine has since served as a bulwark against arbitrary constitutional amendments and expanded the scope of judicial review. Expansion and Modern Developments: Subsequent cases like Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980) and the NJAC ruling (2015) reaffirmed and refined the judiciary’s review powers, especially regarding constitutional amendments and the protection of fundamental rights. Judicial review now encompasses not only legislative acts but also executive actions, ensuring that all branches of government operate within constitutional boundaries. CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS EMPOWERING JUDICIAL REVIEW The Constitution of India empowers the judiciary to exercise judicial review through several explicit provisions. These articles grant the Supreme Court and the High Courts the authority to examine and invalidate legislative and executive actions that contravene the Constitution, thereby ensuring constitutional supremacy and the protection of fundamental rights. Constitutional Provisions Empowering Judicial Review are Article 13: Declares that any law inconsistent with or in derogation of the Fundamental Rights shall be void. This article forms the bedrock for judicial review, allowing courts to strike down unconstitutional laws. Article 32: Grants individuals the right to approach the Supreme Court directly for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights, empowering the Court to issue directions, orders, or writs for their protection. Article 226: Empowers High Courts to issue directions, orders, or writs for the enforcement of Fundamental Rights as well as for any other purpose, extending the scope of judicial review at the state level. Articles 131–136: Provide for the original, appellate, and special leave jurisdictions of the Supreme Court in constitutional, civil, and criminal matters, enabling the Court to review the validity of laws and executive actions. Article 143: Authorizes the President to seek the Supreme Court’s opinion on questions of law or fact, including constitutional interpretation. Article 372: Establishes judicial review of pre-Constitution legislation, ensuring that older laws are also subject to constitutional scrutiny. Article 246: Defines the distribution of legislative powers between the Union and the States,