Judicial Review
/dʒuːˈdɪʃəl rɪˈvjuː/
Constitutional Law Doctrine
Images
CC-licensed · free to useVideo
Definition
The power of courts to examine the constitutionality of legislative and executive actions and strike them down if they violate the Constitution or exceed lawful authority. In India, it is an implied power under Articles 13, 32, and 226. It is also a component of the basic structure of the Constitution and cannot be abrogated even by constitutional amendment.
Examples
Case Study
In L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India (1997), a seven-judge bench held that the power of judicial review vested in the High Courts under Article 226 and the Supreme Court under Article 32 is part of the basic structure of the Constitution. Parliament cannot oust this jurisdiction by creating tribunals that are not subject to oversight by constitutional courts. This case is fundamental to understanding the limits of tribunal reform in India.
Key Cases
L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India
1997(1997) 3 SCC 261
Held that judicial review under Articles 32 and 226 is part of the basic structure. Tribunals cannot exclude High Court oversight. Fundamental to the separation of powers in India.
View on Indian Kanoon →Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association v. Union of India (NJAC Case)
2015(2016) 5 SCC 1
Struck down the 99th Constitutional Amendment and the NJAC Act. Upheld collegium system of judicial appointments. Reaffirmed independence of judiciary as basic structure.
View on Indian Kanoon →Marbury v. Madison
18035 U.S. 137 (1803)
Foundational global precedent establishing judicial review — courts can declare Acts of Congress unconstitutional. Chief Justice John Marshall established this power in the absence of explicit constitutional text.
View on Indian Kanoon →