2 minPolitical Concept

Political Concept

न्यायिक सक्रियता (Judicial Activism)

न्यायिक सक्रियता (Judicial Activism) क्या है?

न्यायिक सक्रियता उस प्रथा को संदर्भित करती है जहाँ न्यायपालिका संवैधानिक मूल्यों को बनाए रखने, मौलिक अधिकारों की रक्षा करने और सुशासन सुनिश्चित करने में एक सक्रिय भूमिका निभाती है, अक्सर कानूनों की व्यापक व्याख्या करके या कार्यपालिका और विधायिका को निर्देश जारी करके। यह केवल मौजूदा कानूनों की व्याख्या करने की पारंपरिक भूमिका से एक प्रस्थान को दर्शाता है।

ऐतिहासिक पृष्ठभूमि

This Concept in News

1 news topics

Punjab & Haryana HC Takes Suo Motu Cognizance of Alleged Fake Encounters, Issues Notice to Police

6 March 2026

यह खबर judicial activism के सबसे महत्वपूर्ण पहलुओं में से एक, यानी suo motu cognizance (स्वयं संज्ञान) को उजागर करती है। यह दर्शाता है कि कैसे अदालतें गंभीर सार्वजनिक चिंता के मामलों में सक्रिय रूप से हस्तक्षेप करती हैं, खासकर जब कार्यकारी कदाचार के आरोप हों, ताकि कानूनी प्रक्रियाओं और मानवाधिकारों का पालन सुनिश्चित किया जा सके। यह घटना judicial activism के सिद्धांत को लागू करती है क्योंकि अदालत औपचारिक शिकायत का इंतजार करने के बजाय सार्वजनिक हित के मामले में सक्रिय रूप से हस्तक्षेप कर रही है। यह पुलिस से जवाबदेही और पारदर्शिता की मांग करके कार्यकारी के कार्यों को चुनौती देता है, यह सवाल उठाता है कि क्या वे कानून की सीमाओं के भीतर काम कर रहे हैं। अदालत की 'हाल की मुठभेड़ों में समानताएं' पर चिंता और उसका स्पष्ट बयान, 'आप उन्हें पकड़ सकते हैं, लेकिन आप कानून को पूरी तरह से अपने हाथों में नहीं ले सकते,' अतिरिक्त-न्यायिक हत्याओं के संभावित पैटर्न के खिलाफ एक न्यायिक प्रतिक्रिया को दर्शाता है। यह पुलिस कार्रवाई की अधिक जांच का कारण बन सकता है, संभावित रूप से अतिरिक्त-न्यायिक हत्याओं पर अंकुश लगा सकता है और जवाबदेही तंत्र को मजबूत कर सकता है। UPSC के लिए, judicial activism को समझना महत्वपूर्ण है क्योंकि यह बताता है कि अदालत ने हस्तक्षेप क्यों किया। इस अवधारणा के बिना, अदालत के कार्य अतिरेक लग सकते हैं। UPSC के लिए, यह सत्ता के संतुलन और शासन में न्यायपालिका की विकसित भूमिका का विश्लेषण करना है, ऐसे वास्तविक दुनिया के उदाहरणों का उपयोग करके।

Feature	Judicial Activism	Judicial Restraint
Approach	Proactive, expansive interpretation of law and Constitution.	Conservative, limited interpretation; deference to legislative/executive.
Intervention	Frequent intervention in policy matters, governance, and legislative gaps.	Intervenes only when absolutely necessary, clear constitutional violation.
Role of Judiciary	Policy-maker, guardian of rights, fills legislative vacuum.	Interpreter of law, upholder of constitutional limits, avoids policy-making.
Focus	Social justice, protection of fundamental rights, accountability of other branches.	Separation of powers, democratic legitimacy, avoiding judicial overreach.
Examples	PILs, Suo Motu Cognizance, Vishaka Guidelines, environmental protection cases.	Refusal to interfere in political questions, upholding legislative intent, narrow interpretation of laws.
Criticism	Judicial overreach, undermining separation of powers, lack of democratic accountability.	Inaction in face of executive/legislative failures, potential for injustice.

Feature	Judicial Activism	Judicial Restraint
Approach	Proactive, expansive interpretation of law and Constitution.	Conservative, limited interpretation; deference to legislative/executive.
Intervention	Frequent intervention in policy matters, governance, and legislative gaps.	Intervenes only when absolutely necessary, clear constitutional violation.
Role of Judiciary	Policy-maker, guardian of rights, fills legislative vacuum.	Interpreter of law, upholder of constitutional limits, avoids policy-making.
Focus	Social justice, protection of fundamental rights, accountability of other branches.	Separation of powers, democratic legitimacy, avoiding judicial overreach.
Examples	PILs, Suo Motu Cognizance, Vishaka Guidelines, environmental protection cases.	Refusal to interfere in political questions, upholding legislative intent, narrow interpretation of laws.
Criticism	Judicial overreach, undermining separation of powers, lack of democratic accountability.	Inaction in face of executive/legislative failures, potential for injustice.

Feature	Judicial Activism	Judicial Restraint
Approach	Proactive, expansive interpretation of law and Constitution.	Conservative, limited interpretation; deference to legislative/executive.
Intervention	Frequent intervention in policy matters, governance, and legislative gaps.	Intervenes only when absolutely necessary, clear constitutional violation.
Role of Judiciary	Policy-maker, guardian of rights, fills legislative vacuum.	Interpreter of law, upholder of constitutional limits, avoids policy-making.
Focus	Social justice, protection of fundamental rights, accountability of other branches.	Separation of powers, democratic legitimacy, avoiding judicial overreach.
Examples	PILs, Suo Motu Cognizance, Vishaka Guidelines, environmental protection cases.	Refusal to interfere in political questions, upholding legislative intent, narrow interpretation of laws.
Criticism	Judicial overreach, undermining separation of powers, lack of democratic accountability.	Inaction in face of executive/legislative failures, potential for injustice.

Feature	Judicial Activism	Judicial Restraint
Approach	Proactive, expansive interpretation of law and Constitution.	Conservative, limited interpretation; deference to legislative/executive.
Intervention	Frequent intervention in policy matters, governance, and legislative gaps.	Intervenes only when absolutely necessary, clear constitutional violation.
Role of Judiciary	Policy-maker, guardian of rights, fills legislative vacuum.	Interpreter of law, upholder of constitutional limits, avoids policy-making.
Focus	Social justice, protection of fundamental rights, accountability of other branches.	Separation of powers, democratic legitimacy, avoiding judicial overreach.
Examples	PILs, Suo Motu Cognizance, Vishaka Guidelines, environmental protection cases.	Refusal to interfere in political questions, upholding legislative intent, narrow interpretation of laws.
Criticism	Judicial overreach, undermining separation of powers, lack of democratic accountability.	Inaction in face of executive/legislative failures, potential for injustice.

Feature	Judicial Activism	Judicial Restraint
Approach	Proactive, expansive interpretation of law and Constitution.	Conservative, limited interpretation; deference to legislative/executive.
Intervention	Frequent intervention in policy matters, governance, and legislative gaps.	Intervenes only when absolutely necessary, clear constitutional violation.
Role of Judiciary	Policy-maker, guardian of rights, fills legislative vacuum.	Interpreter of law, upholder of constitutional limits, avoids policy-making.
Focus	Social justice, protection of fundamental rights, accountability of other branches.	Separation of powers, democratic legitimacy, avoiding judicial overreach.
Examples	PILs, Suo Motu Cognizance, Vishaka Guidelines, environmental protection cases.	Refusal to interfere in political questions, upholding legislative intent, narrow interpretation of laws.
Criticism	Judicial overreach, undermining separation of powers, lack of democratic accountability.	Inaction in face of executive/legislative failures, potential for injustice.

न्यायिक सक्रियता (Judicial Activism)