Doctirne of Judicial Review

The term “judicial review” refers to the process by which the judiciary monitors the power-wielding activities of other government coordinating organisations to make certain that such bodies continue to operate within the parameters established by the Constitution for their scope of authority. According to the idea known as the “Doctrine of the basic structure,” the basic aspects of the Indian Constitution cannot be changed by the Parliament of India since the Indian Constitution has a basic structure. 

What Is the Doctrine of Basic Structure?

The Constitution of India is a living constitution, which means that it may be changed to reflect the evolving requirements of Indian society anytime this becomes necessary. Article 368 of the Constitution provides the Parliament authority to make revisions.

The Doctrine of basic structure was introduced by the judiciary to prohibit the Parliament from misusing its power of modification. The primary tenet of this proposition is that the fundamental aspects of the Constitution of India should not be altered to such a degree that, in the process, the Constitution’s individuality is undermined.

Listed below are some of the fundamental aspects of the Constitution:

• Democracy in a self-governed republic.

• The establishment of equitable conditions in social, economic, and political spheres.

• The freedom to think, speak, believe, worship, and express one’s religion; equality in position and opportunities.

The following categories of issues are topics for judicial review under the Indian Constitution:

• Infringement of fundamental legal rights.

• A breach of other constitutional prohibitions that are spelt forth in the Constitution.

• The passing of a legislative act is inconsistent with the constitutional provisions governing the allocation of powers.

• The executive branch or any other entity receiving important legislative powers delegated by the legislature to that branch.

• A violation of the constraints and limitations.

What Is the Doctrine of Separation of Powers?

It is a type of government in which the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary functions are not centralised in a single body but are distributed among many separate bodies. 

Ravi Shankar Prasad, India’s Minister of Law and Justice, recently said in the Lok Sabha that the Doctrine of separation of powers is a fundamental component of the Constitution’s basic structure. He argued that those democratically elected to the legislature should be responsible for governance and lawmaking. In addition to this, he asked the judicial system to use its discretion in whether or not to accept cases of public interest.

Importance of Constitutional Law: Doctrine of Judicial Review

The relevance of the theory of judicial review lies in the fact that it maintains the Constitution’s position as the preeminent legal document in the country. Ensuring that people’s basic rights are protected is necessary. The principle of judicial review is used when a statute that violates the Constitution is already on the books, at which point it is used to establish whether or not the legislation is unconstitutional.

• Since it grants the court the authority to decide whether or not legislation complies with the Constitution, it assumes an extremely significant role in the contemporary global life situation.

• Possible abuse of authority by either the executive or the legislative may be mitigated with this concept.

• It violates the principle of checks and balances, which is an essential component of democracy. 

• This principle guarantees that no one organ of the government abuses its authority. There is a balance of power between all of the organs of the government.

The principle that there should be a clear division between the branches of government is one that the Supreme Court has upheld for a very long time. In its decision in Special Reference No.1 of 1964 [(1965) 1 SCR 413], this court acknowledged the significance of the division of powers in our form of government even before the fundamental structure theory was incorporated into constitutional law.

Conclusion 

There is now no debate over whether or not the Doctrine exists; rather, the issue that keeps cropping up in discussing the particulars of what the Doctrine entails. The courts have repeatedly validated some of the contents, while others are currently being deliberated upon. The basic structure theory strikes the delicate balance between flexibility and rigidity that need to be included in the amending powers of any Constitution. This balance is made possible by the Doctrine’s provision of fundamental structure.