Topic Details (Notes format)

Judicial Restraint vs. Judicial Activism

Subject: Polity

Book: Indian Polity by M. Laxmikanth

Debates the extent courts should intervene in policy. Judicial restraint advocates minimal interference, respecting the legislature’s and executive’s domain. Judicial activism supports proactive stances to fill legislative gaps or protect rights. While activism has led to progressive decisions on environmental issues, women’s rights, and corruption, excessive activism risks overshadowing elected bodies. Restraint ensures stability and democratic respect. Balancing both is key—courts must uphold constitutional principles yet avoid legislative or policy-making roles. Understanding this spectrum helps contextualize judgments that shape the interplay of law, politics, and social reforms in India’s constitutional democracy.

Practice Questions

संसद सदस्यों का वेतन का निर्धारण किसकी स्वीकृति से होता है?

What is the minimum age for a person to contest elections for the Lok Sabha?

Who appoints the members of the Finance Commission of India?

भारत का राष्ट्रपति किस प्रक्रिया द्वारा चुना जाता है?

विधान सभा अध्यक्ष की योग्यता किस आधार पर निर्धारित होती है?

कार्यपालिका के प्रमुख की नियुक्ति में न्यूनतम अनुभव में निम्नलिखित में से कौन सा आवश्यक नहीं है?

न्यायपालिका के अधिकार का सबसे महत्वपूर्ण आधार क्या है?

Who has the authority to dissolve the Rajya Sabha?

राष्ट्रपति को हटाने की प्रक्रिया किस अनुच्छेद में प्रावधिक है?

Which of the following is NOT a part of the Indian Parliament?