Judicial Activism is not explicitly defined in the Constitution but is an outcome of the judiciary's powers of judicial review (Article 13, 32, 136, 226) and its role as guardian of the Constitution.

PIL allows any citizen or organization to file a petition in the Supreme Court (Article 32) or High Courts (Article 226) on behalf of a public cause or group, relaxing the traditional 'locus standi' rule.

Courts can take suo motu on its own motion cognizance of matters based on newspaper reports, letters, or other forms of communication, treating them as PILs.

Often involves issuing continuing mandamus court orders that remain in effect and require ongoing compliance to ensure implementation of directives, especially in complex environmental cases.

Has been instrumental in environmental protection (e.g., MC Mehta cases), human rights, prison reforms, child labor, and good governance.

Criticisms include encroaching on legislative/executive domains, lack of accountability, and potential for judicial overreach, impacting the principle of separation of powers.

The judiciary has used PILs to enforce fundamental rights, particularly the expanded scope of Article 21 (Right to Life) to include the right to a clean environment.

PILs have led to the establishment of various expert committees and monitoring bodies to oversee the implementation of court orders.

Judicial Activism is not explicitly defined in the Constitution but is an outcome of the judiciary's powers of judicial review (Article 13, 32, 136, 226) and its role as guardian of the Constitution.

PIL allows any citizen or organization to file a petition in the Supreme Court (Article 32) or High Courts (Article 226) on behalf of a public cause or group, relaxing the traditional 'locus standi' rule.

Courts can take suo motu on its own motion cognizance of matters based on newspaper reports, letters, or other forms of communication, treating them as PILs.

Often involves issuing continuing mandamus court orders that remain in effect and require ongoing compliance to ensure implementation of directives, especially in complex environmental cases.

Has been instrumental in environmental protection (e.g., MC Mehta cases), human rights, prison reforms, child labor, and good governance.

Criticisms include encroaching on legislative/executive domains, lack of accountability, and potential for judicial overreach, impacting the principle of separation of powers.

The judiciary has used PILs to enforce fundamental rights, particularly the expanded scope of Article 21 (Right to Life) to include the right to a clean environment.

PILs have led to the establishment of various expert committees and monitoring bodies to oversee the implementation of court orders.