Judicial activism refers to the proactive role adopted by the judiciary in interpreting the Constitution, laws, and policies to promote social justice, uphold fundamental rights, and protect the rights of minority and marginalized groups. It involves the courts going beyond their traditional role of interpreting laws and adjudicating disputes to actively address societal issues, often taking a broader and more progressive approach to the interpretation of constitutional provisions.

Historical Background

Judicial activism in India began to emerge prominently in the 1970s and 1980s. The landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) marked a significant shift, where the Supreme Court established the Basic Structure Doctrine, limiting Parliament's power to amend the Constitution and ensuring the protection of certain fundamental principles. This laid the foundation for a more active judiciary.

Evolution

The evolution of judicial activism in India has been characterized by the expansion of public interest litigation (PIL), a more liberal interpretation of fundamental rights, and a focus on social and economic justice. The judiciary has played a crucial role in environmental protection, human rights, gender equality, and transparency in governance.

Advantages of Judicial Activism

1.Addresses Societal Issues: Judicial activism allows the judiciary to address pressing social issues and ensure the protection of marginalized groups.

2.Responds to Legislative and Executive Inaction: It serves as a corrective mechanism when the legislature and executive fail to address important social concerns.