Civics - Judiciary – CBSE NCERT Study Resources

Our textbook shows that the judiciary safeguards Fundamental Rights under Article 32. Here, the citizen can file a PIL (Public Interest Litigation) for justice. Historical/Geographical Analysis:

• In Mohini Jain vs Karnataka (1992), the court ruled education as a right.
• In Unni Krishnan vs Andhra Pradesh (1993), free education until 14 was upheld.

Judicial independence ensures fair decisions without bias. Historical/Geographical Analysis:

• The Basic Structure Doctrine (Kesavananda Bharati case, 1973) prevents interference.
• Security of tenure and fixed salaries (Constitution Articles 124-147) shield judges.

PIL allows anyone to approach courts for public issues. Historical/Geographical Analysis:

• In M.C. Mehta vs Union of India (1986), the Ganga pollution case, factories were regulated.
• Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union of India (1996) enforced the Polluter Pays Principle.

The dispute first goes to the District Court, then High Court, and finally Supreme Court. Historical/Geographical Analysis:

• District Courts handle local cases (e.g., property disputes).
• Supreme Court interprets the Constitution (e.g., Right to Privacy verdict, 2017).

In 1975, the Supreme Court canceled Indira Gandhi's election due to electoral malpractices, showcasing judicial fairness.

• Prevented misuse of power by the executive.
• Set a precedent for free & fair elections.

Today, courts continue to resolve election disputes, like in Arunachal Pradesh (2016) and Madhya Pradesh (2020), ensuring democratic integrity.

In Olga Tellis (1985), PIL ensured pavement dwellers' right to livelihood.

• Accessible justice for the poor (e.g., Vishaka Guidelines for workplace harassment).
• Environmental protection (e.g., Delhi Vehicular Pollution case).

Recent PILs addressed migrant crises (2020) and healthcare shortages, proving its role in social justice.

The Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) limited Parliament's power to amend the Constitution's basic structure.

• Upheld rights in Maneka Gandhi case (right to travel).
• Struck down Section 377 in Navtej Johar case (LGBTQ+ rights).

Courts recently protected privacy (Aadhaar case) and dissent (Farmers' Protest), balancing state power.

District Courts handle local cases like property disputes (Ram vs Shyam land conflict), while High Courts hear appeals.

• District Courts: Faster resolution (e.g., Delhi rent disputes).
• High Courts: Wider jurisdiction (e.g., Bombay HC's bail orders during protests).

During COVID-19, High Courts intervened in oxygen shortages, showing their supervisory role.

Case Context: The Golaknath case (1967) established that Fundamental Rights cannot be amended, protecting citizens from arbitrary laws. Our textbook shows it strengthened judicial review.

Historical/Geographical Analysis: Unlike Golaknath, the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973) allowed amendments but introduced the Basic Structure Doctrine, balancing Parliament and judiciary powers.

Current Relevance: Recent debates on reservations and CAA refer to these cases to ensure rights aren’t violated. Examples: Right to Privacy (2017), NJAC verdict (2015).

Case Context: The judiciary ensured RTE Act implementation, mandating free education for 6-14-year-olds. We studied how this reduced inequality.

Historical/Geographical Analysis: Like Brown vs Board (1954) in the USA, which ended racial segregation in schools, RTE promotes inclusivity.

Current Relevance: Recent PILs include demands for online education during COVID-19 (2020) and infrastructure upgrades in rural schools (2022).

Case Context: The Maneka Gandhi case (1978) broadened Article 21 to include right to travel and fair procedure, as per our textbook.

Historical/Geographical Analysis: Unlike AK Gopalan (1950), which limited liberty to physical freedom, Maneka Gandhi included procedural fairness.

Current Relevance: Used in Right to Privacy (2017) and internet shutdowns cases (2020) to protect digital freedoms.

Case Context: The Collegium System, created by Three Judges Cases, lets judges appoint judges. Critics call it opaque, as per NCERT.

Historical/Geographical Analysis: The NJAC (2014) aimed to include government in appointments but was struck down for violating judicial independence.

Current Relevance: Recent debates include demands for diversity in appointments (2021) and faster filling of vacancies (2023).

The Judiciary plays a crucial role in resolving disputes by interpreting and applying the law impartially. In this case:

• The District Court and High Court act as higher authorities to ensure justice when local bodies fail.
• Courts examine evidence, hear witnesses, and deliver judgments based on legal principles.

An independent judiciary is vital in a democracy because:

• It ensures no influence from the government or powerful individuals, upholding rule of law.
• It protects citizens' fundamental rights and maintains social order.
• It acts as a check on misuse of power by other branches of government.

Without independence, justice could be biased, leading to unfair outcomes.

The Judiciary safeguards citizens' rights by:

• Reviewing actions of authorities (like police) to prevent misuse of power.
• Ensuring laws align with the Constitution, especially for vulnerable groups like children.

In this case, the fundamental right violated was Right to Life and Personal Liberty (Article 21), which includes:

• Protection against arbitrary arrest.
• The right to fair treatment under law.

Courts enforce these rights through writs and judgments, ensuring justice for all, regardless of age or status.

The judiciary plays a crucial role in resolving disputes by acting as an impartial authority. In this case:

• The court listened to both farmers, ensuring fair hearing.
• It examined evidence like land records, applying legal principles.
• It delivered a binding judgment, ending the conflict.

The rule of law ensures:

• Equal treatment for all citizens, regardless of status.
• Predictability in decisions, as laws are applied uniformly.
• Prevents arbitrary use of power, maintaining social harmony.

Without the judiciary, disputes could escalate, leading to violence or injustice.

The violated Fundamental Right is Protection against Arrest and Detention (Article 22), which guarantees:

• Right to be informed of arrest grounds.
• Right to consult a lawyer.
• Right to be produced before a magistrate within 24 hours.

The judiciary safeguards rights by:

• Acting as a guardian of the Constitution, reviewing executive actions.
• Issuing writs (like Habeas Corpus) to release unlawfully detained persons.
• Setting precedents to prevent future violations, ensuring accountability.

This case shows how courts protect individuals from state overreach, upholding democratic values.

The farmers approached the District Court because the panchayat, which is a local dispute-resolution body, could not resolve their conflict. The judiciary, represented by the District Court, has the authority to interpret laws and deliver binding judgments in legal disputes.

The role of the judiciary in resolving conflicts includes:

• Ensuring fairness and justice by interpreting laws and applying them to specific cases.
• Providing a hierarchical system of courts (like District Courts, High Courts, and the Supreme Court) to allow appeals if parties are dissatisfied with a verdict.
• Maintaining rule of law by preventing individuals from taking the law into their own hands.

In this case, the judiciary ensured that the dispute was resolved legally and fairly, and the option to appeal guaranteed the dissatisfied farmer a chance for reconsideration.

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is significant because it allows any citizen or organization to approach the court on behalf of those whose rights are being violated, especially in cases involving public welfare. In this scenario, the PIL helped villagers seek justice against environmental harm caused by the factory.

The judiciary acts as a guardian of the Constitution by:

• Ensuring that fundamental rights (like the Right to Life under Article 21) are protected, which includes the right to a clean environment.
• Holding authorities and private entities accountable for violating constitutional principles, such as environmental protection.
• Using its power of judicial review to strike down actions that harm public interest.

Here, the High Court upheld constitutional values by directing the factory to take corrective measures, demonstrating the judiciary's role in safeguarding citizens' rights.

The judiciary plays a crucial role in resolving disputes like the one between the neighbors by interpreting and applying the law fairly. In this case, the District Court would examine the evidence, such as land records and witness testimonies, to determine the correct boundary. The court ensures that the decision is based on rule of law, not personal bias.

Judiciary is important for maintaining justice because:

• It provides a neutral platform for resolving conflicts.
• It upholds the fundamental rights of citizens.
• It ensures that no individual or group can take the law into their own hands.

Without the judiciary, disputes could escalate into violence, and weaker sections might be denied justice. Thus, the judiciary acts as the guardian of justice in society.

The judiciary balances conflicting interests by carefully examining both sides of the issue. In this case, the High Court would consider:

• The students' right to protest under Article 19 of the Constitution.
• The factory owners' right to conduct business.
• The potential environmental impact of the factory.

The court might order an environmental impact assessment or suggest compromises, such as relocating the factory or implementing pollution controls. The judiciary ensures that neither party's rights are violated unjustly.

Its role in protecting citizens' rights includes:

• Safeguarding fundamental rights like freedom of speech and expression.
• Preventing exploitation of natural resources.
• Ensuring that development projects do not harm public health.

Thus, the judiciary acts as a mediator and protector of democratic values.

The Judicial Review is a powerful tool given to the judiciary under the Indian Constitution. It allows the courts, especially the Supreme Court and High Courts, to examine and invalidate any law or government action that violates the Constitution or Fundamental Rights.

In Rahul's case, the Supreme Court used this power to strike down a law passed by Parliament because it conflicted with citizens' Fundamental Rights. This ensures that no branch of government (legislature, executive, or judiciary) becomes too powerful, maintaining the balance of power.

Importance of Judicial Review:

• Protects the Constitution and citizens' rights.
• Prevents misuse of power by the legislature or executive.
• Upholds the principle of rule of law.
• Ensures democracy functions fairly.

The judiciary plays a crucial role in resolving disputes like the one between the two farmers. When local bodies like the panchayat fail, courts step in to ensure justice is served.

Role of Judiciary:

• Interprets laws: Courts examine evidence and apply relevant laws to decide who owns the land.
• Impartial decision-making: Unlike local bodies, courts are neutral and free from biases.
• Enforcement of rights: Ensures legal rights, such as property ownership, are protected.

Why courts are the final authority:

• They follow a structured legal process.
• Their decisions are based on the Constitution and laws.
• They provide a fair chance to both parties to present their case.

The Judiciary plays a crucial role in resolving disputes by interpreting laws and ensuring justice is served. In this case, the District Court acted as the first level of justice, and when one farmer was dissatisfied, the High Court provided a higher platform for appeal. This shows the hierarchy of courts in India, which ensures:

• Fairness: Multiple levels allow for re-examination of decisions.
• Accessibility: People can seek justice at different levels based on the complexity of the case.
• Checks and balances: Higher courts can correct errors made by lower courts.

This system upholds the principle of justice for all and maintains public trust in the legal system.

The Supreme Court has the following judicial powers:

• Guardian of the Constitution: It ensures laws align with the Constitution.
• Protector of Fundamental Rights: It can strike down laws violating these rights.
• Final interpreter: Its decisions are binding on all courts.

In the RTE case, the Supreme Court upheld Article 21A, which guarantees free education to children aged 6-14. By enforcing this, the Court:

• Ensured equal opportunities for all children.
• Strengthened the Right to Education as a Fundamental Right.
• Demonstrated its role in safeguarding citizens' rights against any violations.

This judgment highlights how the judiciary acts as a shield for democratic values.