Open Access Research Article
SENTINELS OF JUSTICE: SUPREME COURT ROLE IN SAFEGUARDING CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
Published Paper
Article Details
SENTINELS OF JUSTICE: SUPREME
COURT ROLE IN SAFEGUARDING CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
AUTHORED BY
- ABDUL RAHEEM1
& DR.
RAJEEV KUMAR SINGH2
ABSTRACT
The role of
the Supreme Court as the sentinel of justice in safeguarding constitutional
rights is paramount in ensuring the rule of law and upholding the principles of
democracy. This abstract provides a comprehensive overview of the Supreme
Court's pivotal role in protecting constitutional rights in India.
The
Supreme Court of India, established under the Constitution, acts as the
guardian of fundamental rights enshrined in Part III of the Constitution.
Through its power of judicial review, the Court ensures that the executive and
legislative branches adhere to constitutional principles and do not violate the
rights of citizens.
This abstract
delves into the historical context
of the Supreme Court's evolution as a protector of constitutional rights,
tracing landmark cases that have shaped its jurisprudence. From the early years of Indian
independence to the present day, the Supreme
Court has played
a crucial role in interpreting
and enforcing constitutional provisions related to individual liberties,
equality, and justice.
The
abstract highlights key areas where the Supreme Court has intervened to
safeguard constitutional rights. These include protecting freedom of speech and
expression, ensuring equality before the law, safeguarding the rights of
minorities and marginalized communities, and upholding the principles of due
process and fair trial.
Moreover,
the abstract discusses the mechanisms through which the Supreme Court exercises
its jurisdiction to protect constitutional rights. This includes
the writ jurisdiction under Article 32 of
the Constitution, which empowers the Court to issue writs for the enforcement
of fundamental rights, as well as its appellate jurisdiction to hear appeals
from lower courts and tribunals.
Keywords: Constitutional rights,
Sentinels, Federalism, Fundamental rights, Judicial activism, Judicial restraint.
INTRODUCTION
The
Constitution of India is a supreme law of the land, and the role of the Supreme
Court of India is protecting and interpreting the Constitution is crucial to
ensuring the principles of justice, democracy, and equality enshrined
in the Constitution are upheld.
The Supreme Court of India is the final court of
appeal and has the power of judicial review, which allows it to examine the
constitutionality of laws and executive actions.3
One
of the primary roles of the Supreme Court is to protect the fundamental rights
of Indian citizens. The Constitution of India guarantees several fundamental
rights, including the right to equality, freedom of speech and expression, and
the right to life and personal liberty. The Supreme Court has played a vital
role in interpreting and protecting these fundamental rights, ensuring that they are not violated
by the government or any other entity4. The Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Constitution has also been essential in protecting the democratic principles of India.
The federal
structure of India
is another critical
principle enshrined in the Constitution of India. The
Constitution provides for a division of powers between the central government
and the state governments, ensuring that each level of government has the
autonomy to govern as per their respective mandates. The Supreme Court has
played a vital role in protecting the autonomy
of the state governments from encroachment by the central
government and ensuring that the federal structure of the
Constitution is not undermined.
The
Constitution of India is a living document, and its interpretation is essential
to ensure its continued relevance in changing times. The Supreme
Court of India has the power to interpret
the Constitution and provide guidance to the government on its implementation.
The Constitution of India is the cornerstone of the country’s legal framework.
It lays down the fundamental principles and values on which the country’s
governance is based.
The Constitution provides the framework for the functioning of the government, the judiciary, and
other institutions in the country5.
The interpretation of the Constitution is, therefore, a critical aspect of
ensuring that the principles enshrined in it are upheld. The interpretation of
the Constitution of India is primary responsibility of the judiciary, with the
Supreme Court being the ultimate
interpreter of the Constitution. The Supreme Court has the power of judicial
review, which means that it can declare any law or action of the government
unconstitutional if it violates the provisions of the Constitution.6
INTERPRETATION AND PROTECTION OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
The Constitution of India, officially adopted on the historic date of January
26th, 1950, serves as
the preeminent legal
framework governing the nation. This foundational document
provides a comprehensive structure for governance, affords protection to
fundamental rights, and delineates the powers and functions of the various
branches of government. Central to this intricate constitutional framework
stands the Supreme Court of India, holding the highest judicial authority
within the country. The Supreme Court occupies a paramount position in
safeguarding and elucidating the Constitution, ensuring the unwavering
adherence to its constitutional tenets, and securing the rights and liberties
of individuals. Functioning as an autonomous
and impartial judicial
institution, the Supreme
Court assumes the role of a vigilant custodian of the Constitution.
It bears the solemn responsibility of upholding the sanctity of the Constitution and rigorously enforcing its provisions. A pivotal aspect
of its significance lies in
its exercise of judicial review, which empowers it to scrutinize the
constitutionality of legislative enactments and executive actions. This power
is instrumental in ensuring that the government operates strictly within the
bounds delineated by the Constitution, thus averting any infringement upon
fundamental rights. The Supreme Court wields the authority to nullify any law
or action found incongruous with the Constitution, thus upholding the
democratic principles enshrined. Among its primary functions, the Supreme Court
undertakes the task of interpreting the Constitution.7 It serves as the ultimate
arbiter of constitutional matters, offering
authoritative interpretations and elucidations of its provisions. Through its
judicious pronouncements, the Court
defines the parameters and nuances of fundamental rights,
clarifies constitutional clauses, and resolves constitutional ambiguities. These interpretative
interventions by the Court hold
a pivotal role in shaping the comprehension and implementation of the
Constitution, providing both legal clarity and guidance to the government and
citizenry. Over the years of its
existence, the Supreme Court
has consistently upheld the principles of justice, equality,
and the rule of law, thereby contributing significantly to India’s legal and constitutional evolution8.
HISTORY AND ESTABLISHMENT OF THE SUPREME COURT
In 1861, the British parliament passed the Indian High Courts Act to
establish High Courts in various provinces. This abolished the Supreme Courts
of Calcutta, Madras,
and Bombay which previously served as the highest
courts in their respective regions.9
The new High Courts exercised the highest judicial authority over all cases in
their territories until 1935.
The Government of India Act of 1935 introduced the Federal Court
of India which functioned
as the highest appellate body for 12 years. However, in 1950 as India
transitioned to independence, the Abolition of Privy Council
Jurisdiction Act was enacted. This paved the way
for the establishment of the Supreme Court of independent India on January 26,
1950. The Supreme Court sat in session for the very first time on January 28th,
1950, marking the beginning of its role as the highest court and final
interpreter of the Constitution of India.
JUDICIAL REVIEW:
SAFEGUARDING CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY
Judicial review is a significant authority vested in the Supreme Court of
India, enabling it to assess the constitutionality of laws, executive orders, and governmental actions. The Supreme Court’s jurisdiction to conduct
judicial review is founded on the Constitution of India, which designates it as
the apex judicial body within the nation.10
The Supreme Court’s role in upholding constitutional validity holds paramount
importance in preserving the equilibrium among the three branches of government
and ensuring compliance with the Constitution’s provisions. The power of
judicial review empowers the Supreme Court to determine whether legislative or
executive actions align with the constitutional principles and rights enshrined
in the Constitution. When a law or action is challenged as unconstitutional,
the Supreme Court possesses the authority to interpret the pertinent constitutional provisions and
render a verdict on its validity. Should the Court find that a law or action transgresses the Constitution, it has
the prerogative to declare it unconstitutional or amend
it to bring it in line with constitutional requisites. The Supreme Court’s
decisions in such cases are legally binding and carry far- reaching
consequences. The Supreme Court of India has played an instrumental role in
upholding constitutional validity
through its exercise
of judicial review.
It has issued landmark
judgments on diverse subjects, encompassing enriching fundamental rights,
federalism, the separation of powers, and the extent of government authority.11 These verdicts have significantly
moulded India’s constitutional landscape and have served as a bulwark in
safeguarding the rights
and freedoms of its citizens. It is crucial
to emphasize that the power of
judicial review is not absolute, and the Supreme Court exercises it within the
framework delineated by the Constitution. The Court’s role is to interpret and apply the Constitution rather than create or amend it. Guided by
the principle of judicial restraint, the Court exercises caution, and refrains
from encroaching upon the domains of the legislative and executive branches
unless there is a clear infringement of constitutional principles. The Supreme
Court of India assumes a vital role in upholding constitutional validity
through the mechanism of judicial review. Its judgments serve as a check on the
powers of the legislative and executive branches, ensuring their actions remain
within the constitutional bounds and safeguarding the fundamental rights and
principles enshrined in the Constitution.
ROLE AS INTERPRETER OF CONSTITUTION
The Supreme Court of India plays a crucial role as the interpreter of the
Constitution. As the highest
judicial authority in the country, it is entrusted with the responsibility of
interpreting the provisions of the Constitution and clarifying their meaning
and scope. This power of interpretation allows
the Supreme Court to give effect to the intent
and purpose of the framers of the Constitution and ensure
its continued relevance in a changing society. The Constitution of India
is a living document that lays down the fundamental principles, rights, and governance
structures for the country.12 However,
the text of the Constitution is not always explicit or exhaustive in addressing
all possible situations or resolving legal ambiguities. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s
role as the interpreter of the Constitution becomes crucial in providing clarity and resolving disputes13. The Court’s interpretation of the
Constitution is guided by various principles, including the literal rule,
contextual interpretation, purposive interpretation, and harmonious construction. The Supreme Court of India assumes a vital role in upholding
constitutional bounds
and safeguarding the fundamental rights and principles enshrined in the Constitution.14
PROTECTING FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS
The Supreme Court of India assumes a pivotal role in safeguarding the
fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution. Fundamental rights represent
the bedrock liberties and safeguards guaranteed to every citizen, and the
Supreme Court functions as a guardian tasked with their preservation and enforcement. Validity
through the mechanism of judicial review.
Its judgments serve as a check on the powers of the legislative and
executive branches, ensuring their actions remain within the constitutional.15
The Court executes this critical role through a range of mechanisms:
1.
Judicial Review: The
Supreme Court possesses the authority of judicial review,
enabling it to scrutinize the constitutionality of laws, executive actions, and government policies. If any legislation or action is deemed to
infringe upon fundamental rights, the Court can declare it unconstitutional and
strike it down. There are various provisions of the system of judicial review have been granted
by our Constitution in various
articles. These articles
are Article 13, 32, 131-136, 143, 226, 145, 246, 254,
251 and 372.
2.
Writ
Jurisdiction: The Supreme Court is vested with the power to issue writs, including habeas corpus, mandamus,
certiorari, prohibition, and quo warranto. These writs serve as potent tools
for safeguarding fundamental rights by offering remedies to individuals whose
rights have been violated or are under threat.16
Article 32 which is a Fundamental Right guarantees the right to move the
Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of Fundamental
Rights.
3.
Public Interest Litigation (PIL): The Supreme Court has expanded the scope of PIL, allowing
individuals and organizations to initiate cases on behalf of marginalized and
disadvantaged groups. PIL empowers the Court to address systemic issues and
protect the fundamental rights of those who may lack direct access to the
Court.
4.
Expansive Interpretation: The Supreme Court has adopted a broad and progressive
interpretation of fundamental rights to adapt to evolving societal and legal
dynamics.17 It has expanded the purview of
rights such as the right to life, liberty, equality, freedom of speech, and
expression, while also recognizing emerging rights like the right to privacy.
5.
Protecting Minority Rights: The Supreme Court plays a pivotal role in safeguarding the rights of minority communities and marginalized segments of
society. It intervenes in cases involving discrimination, atrocities, and the denial
of basic rights
to ensure equal
treatment and protection for
all citizens.
6. Enforcement of Judgments: The Supreme
Court actively monitors
the implementation of its judgments and ensures compliance by
government bodies and authorities. It can issue
directives and orders
to guarantee the upholding and respect of
fundamental rights.
Through its landmark
judgments, the Supreme
Court has not only moulded
the legal framework but has also made substantial
contributions to the protection of fundamental rights in India18. It has been at the forefront of
advancing social justice, gender equality, and individual freedoms.
Nevertheless, it is essential to acknowledge that the Supreme Court’s role in
protecting fundamental rights is not devoid of challenges. The Court must
strike a delicate balance between individual rights and the legitimate concerns
of the state. Moreover, it faces challenges in ensuring the effective
enforcement and implementation of its judgments across all levels of
governance.
CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
The Apex Court in several cases on several
subject matters interpreted unenumerated rights and gave several decisions
to protect such kind of unenumerated rights
and they are as follows: Right to travel abroad and Right
to fair justice are relating to Article
21 protection of life and personal liberty.19
The right to travel abroad and right to fair justice are nowhere specifically
mentioned in the Constitution, but the Apex Court by interpreting declared
these are fundamental rights and included in Article 21 of the Indian
Constitution and as follows; In Maneka Gandhi v/s Union of India20, in this case the petitioner Maneka Gandhi was issued
passport
on 1st June 1978 as per the Passport Act,
1967, but on 02nd July 1977, the Regional Passport Office ordered her to
surrender her passport without giving any reasons.21
The
petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 32 for violation of fundamental
rights guaranteed under Articles 14,
19 and 21 of the Constitution alleging that section 10 (3) of the Passport Act, 1967 was ultra virus the
Constitution. Further, the petitioner contended that the administrative order
seized the passport on 4th July 1977 was infringed upon the petitioner's rights
of freedom of speech and expression, right to life and personal liberty, right
to travel abroad, and right to freedom of movement.
On
the other hand, the respondent stated that Article 21 contains the phrase
Procedure established by law and such procedure does not have to pass the test of reasonability and need not
necessarily be in consonance with the Articles
14 and 19 of the Constitution. Indeed, the Hon'ble Supreme Court attempts
to analyse and expanded the scope of Article 21 and the Court
was interpreted personal liberty means freedom from physical restraint and
coercion which is not authorized by law.
Prior
to this case Article 21 guaranteed the Right to Life and Personal liberty only
against arbitrary actions of executive and not from the Legislative action.
Perhaps, Maneka Gandhi's case extended the protection against legislative
actions also. In this case, the Apex
Court was confirmed the Golden Triangle rule to protect the democracy and fair
justice through the procedure established by law and introduced new concept of
due process of law.22
Therefore,
in this case the Apex Court stated that it is violation of Article 14, since the aggrieved
party was not given opportunity to hear and it was also violation of Article 21, since it does not affirm to the word procedure as mentioned in the clause
and confirmed the right to travel abroad is a fundamental right.
REFERENCE
·
A.K. Gopalan
v. State of Madras case
·
ADM Jabalpur
v. Shivakant Shukla
·
Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1984)
·
Bashesher Nath v. I.T. Commissioner
·
Bhikaji Narain
Dhakras v. State of M.P.
·
City of London v. Wood case
·
Dr. Thomas
Bonham v. College
of Physicians
·
Golaknath v. State of Punjab
·
I.R. Coelho
v. State of Tamil Nadu
case
·
Emperor v. Burah.
·
Indra Sawhney
v. Union of India
·
K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India
·
Kesavananda Bharti
v. State of Kerala
·
Les Verts
v. European Parliament
·
Madras Bar Association v. Union of India
·
Maneka Gandhi
v. Union of India
·
Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India
·
National Legal Services Authority v. Union of India
·
State of Madras v. Rao, Justice
Khanna
·
People’s Union
for Civil Liberties
v. Union of India
Article Information
SENTINELS OF JUSTICE: SUPREME COURT ROLE IN SAFEGUARDING CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS
Authors: ABDUL RAHEEM, DR. RAJEEV KUMAR SINGH
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2024/05/01
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.