Judicial Activism

Judicial activism, particularly in light of recent developments in this respect, has often been a source of heated debate. With many contentious decisions in the last few years, the judges of the Supreme Court, as well as the various High Courts, have again sparked a debate that has always been very strong. However, it is still a mystery what the term "judicial activism" really connotes. The State is under the primary duty, under the Indian Constitution, to ensure justice, liberty, equality, and fraternity in the land. The Indian judiciary has been seen to be the protector and defender of the Indian Constitution in this context. In view of its constitutional obligation, whenever necessary, the Indian judiciary has played an active role in protecting the fundamental rights of the citizen against the unfair, unreasonable, and unequal actions/inactions of the State. The complex phase of judicial outlook in a changing society is judicial activism. In a January 1947 Fortune magazine article titled "judicial activism" written by Arthur Schlesinger Jr. invented the phrase "The Supreme Court: 1947" Law making has taken on new dimensions in recent years through the judicial activism of the courts. A healthy pattern of reading law in the social context has been embraced by the judiciary. Judges often tend to exceed their authority to decide cases before the Court of Justice. According to the Constitution, they are expected to exercise judgment in reading the law. However, in reply to legal issues before the Court, judicial activists appear to be practicing their will to make law.