Justice Chandrachud: No area of polity should be exempt from review
Former CJI emphasizes judicial review's importance, cautions against state regulation of content.
Photo by Rai Singh Uriarte
Former Chief Justice of India (CJI) D.Y. Chandrachud (retd.) stated on 17 January 2026, that no area of the Constitution should be immune from judicial review. Speaking on "Why the Constitution matters," he addressed the prolonged incarceration of activist Umar Khalid, highlighting the problem with national security laws that invert the principles of bail.
He emphasized that raising national security as a defense doesn't halt judicial review, and courts must scrutinize the claim's validity. On free speech, he noted India's societal differences from the U.S., cautioning against state regulation of social media content while acknowledging the need for boundaries set by trusted institutions. Regarding the Supreme Court's decision on electoral bonds, he said legalizing anonymous political donations was impermissible as it would legitimize political corruption.
Key Facts
Former CJI: No area of polity immune from judicial review
National security defense: Doesn't end judicial review
Social media: Caution against state regulation
Electoral bonds: Anonymous donations impermissible
UPSC Exam Angles
GS Paper II: Indian Constitution, Judiciary
Link to Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles
Potential for analytical questions on judicial activism vs. judicial restraint
Visual Insights
Judicial Review & Its Implications
Mind map illustrating the scope and implications of judicial review, as highlighted by Justice Chandrachud's statement.
Judicial Review
- ●Constitutional Supremacy
- ●Scope of Review
- ●Limitations
- ●Impact on Fundamental Rights
More Information
Background
The concept of judicial review in India has its roots in the constitutional framework adopted after independence. While not explicitly mentioned in a single article, it is derived from Articles 13, 32, 226, and 246 of the Constitution, which grant the Supreme Court and High Courts the power to interpret the Constitution and laws. The power of judicial review was significantly tested during the Emergency (1975-1977), when fundamental rights were suspended.
Landmark cases like *Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala* (1973) established the basic structure doctrine, limiting the Parliament's power to amend the Constitution's fundamental features. This doctrine became a cornerstone of judicial review, ensuring that constitutional amendments do not alter the core principles of the Constitution.
The evolution of judicial review reflects a continuous negotiation between the judiciary, the legislature, and the executive, shaping the balance of power in India's democratic system.
Latest Developments
In recent years, there has been an increased focus on judicial accountability and transparency, with debates surrounding the appointment of judges and the functioning of the judiciary. The National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC) Act, passed in 2014, aimed to change the process of appointing judges, but it was struck down by the Supreme Court in 2015, reaffirming the collegium system. The use of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has also evolved, with concerns raised about its potential misuse.
The judiciary has been actively involved in addressing issues related to environmental protection, social justice, and governance. The increasing backlog of cases remains a significant challenge, prompting discussions on judicial reforms, including the use of technology and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. The debate on the scope of judicial review continues, particularly in areas involving economic policy and national security.
Practice Questions (MCQs)
1. Consider the following statements regarding the 'Basic Structure' doctrine of the Indian Constitution: 1. It was first propounded in the *Golaknath v. State of Punjab* case. 2. It limits the amending power of the Parliament. 3. It includes secularism and democracy as its elements. Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
- A.1 and 2 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
Show Answer
Answer: B
The Basic Structure doctrine originated in the *Kesavananda Bharati* case, not *Golaknath*. It does limit Parliament's power to amend the Constitution, and includes secularism and democracy as its elements.
2. With reference to Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in India, which of the following statements is NOT correct?
- A.It was introduced to provide access to justice to marginalized sections of society.
- B.It can be filed by any citizen for a public cause.
- C.The concept of PIL originated in the United Kingdom.
- D.The courts can take suo moto cognizance of matters under PIL.
- E.E) It can be filed by any citizen for a public cause.
Show Answer
Answer: C
The concept of PIL originated in the United States, not the United Kingdom. The other statements are correct regarding the purpose and scope of PIL in India.
3. Assertion (A): Judicial review is an essential feature of a federal constitution. Reason (R): It safeguards the division of powers between the center and the states. In the context of the above, which of the following is correct?
- A.Both A and R are true, and R is the correct explanation of A.
- B.Both A and R are true, but R is NOT the correct explanation of A.
- C.A is true, but R is false.
- D.A is false, but R is true.
Show Answer
Answer: A
Judicial review is indeed essential for a federal constitution to ensure that neither the center nor the states overstep their constitutional boundaries. The reason correctly explains the assertion.
4. Which of the following committees/commissions is/are associated with judicial reforms in India? 1. Malimath Committee 2. Justice V.S. Malimath Committee 3. National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution Select the correct answer using the code given below:
- A.1 only
- B.2 and 3 only
- C.1 and 3 only
- D.1, 2 and 3
Show Answer
Answer: B
The Malimath Committee and the National Commission to Review the Working of the Constitution (NCRWC) both made recommendations related to judicial reforms. Option 1 is incorrect because the committee was chaired by Justice V.S. Malimath.