Case the count: Supreme Court criticism

TeaHe has been subjected to baseless criticism by the Supreme Court of India by the ruling BJP classes and Vice President Jagdeep Dhanker, in relation to the separation of powers between various branches of the government, and the principles of check and balance. Not surprisingly, a bench of the Supreme Court noted the allegation that it was infiltrating executive and legislative works. In a petition, the court was requested to direct the Center under Article 355 and 356 to deal with the situation of violence in West Bengal. In the second, court intervention was sought to prevent pornographic content on online platforms. The Calcutta High Court had earlier ordered the deployment of central forces to prevent violence in Murshidabad in West Bengal. Judicial review of legislative and executive decisions is an integral part of India’s constitutional democracy. The decisions of the executive and legislature can be investigated by the judiciary to determine that they are in line with the Constitution, and even constitutional amendments are subject to ‘basic structure’ testing. There are several constitutional avenues for judicial intervention in building and enforcement of laws. Article 13 gives the judiciary the power to reduce laws that violate fundamental rights. Articles 32 and 226 give to the Supreme Court and High Courts respectively, the power to issue rights for the enforcement of fundamental rights, and beyond.

The perception that the judiciary is under the legislature is in line with the constitutional plan. In fact, the judiciary is expected to insulate the rule of the law with the pressure of public opinion that members of the legislature represent. It is in creative friction between various institutions of the state that a society can achieve stability in rule. The argument that assemblies can pass any law on a majority basis, a major argument. The erosion of the difference between the executive and the legislature has already created a crisis of accountability in the rule at the national and state level in India. The attempt to intimidate the judiciary in the name of legislative domination is a threat to democracy – not further. In a recent judgment, which set a deadline for the Governor and the President to work on the laws passed by the Legislative Assembly, the Supreme Court restored the authority of elected assemblies, which was being trampled by an uneven governor and arbitrary action by the President. Critics of the judiciary completely remember this point.