The judicial activism is use of judicial power to articulate and

enforce what is beneficial for the society in general and

people at large. Supreme Court
despite its constitutional limitation has com e up with fl
ying colors as achampion of justice in the true sense of the
word. JUSTICE this seven letterword is one of the most
debated ones in the entire English dictionary. With the entire world
population being linked to it, there is no doubt about the fact that with
changing tongues the definition does change. The judicial
activism has touched almost every aspect of life in India to do
positive justice and in the process has gone beyond, what is
prescribed by law or written in blackand white. Only thing the
judiciary must keep in mind is that while going over board
to do justice to common man must not overstep the
limitationsprescribed by sacrosanct i.e. The Constitution.
Judicial activism describes judicial
r u l i n g s s u s p e c t e d o f b e i n g b a s e d o n personal or
political considerations rather than on existing law.
The question of judicial activism is closely related to constitutional
interpretation,statutory construction, and separation of powers.
Judicial activism implies going beyond the normal constraints appl
ied to jurists and the Constitution, which gives jurists the right to st
rike down any legislation or rule against the precedent if it goes
against the Constitution. Thus, ruling
against majority opinion or judicial
precedent is not necessarily judicial activism unless it is active. In
the words of Justice J.S Verma , Judicial Activism must
necessarily mean the active process of implementation

of the rule of law, essential for the preservation of a functional

democracy.
In a modern democratic set up, judicial activism should be looked
upon as
am e c h a n i s m t o c u r b l e g i s l a t i v e a d v e n t u r i s m a n d e
x e c u t i v e t y r a n n y b y enforcing Constitutional limits. That is, it is
only when the Legislature and the Executive fail in their
responsibility or try to avoid it, that judicial activism has a
role to play. In other words, judicial activism is to be
viewed as a damage control exercise, in which sense, it is
only a temporary
phase.Recent times have seen ju diciary play a intru siv
e roles in the areas of constitutionally reserved for the
other branches of governments. Issues in judicial activism
arise, when governance is apparently done by Mandamus.
The Constitution of India operates in happy harmony with the
instrumentalities of the executive and the legislature. But to be
truly great,the judiciary exercising democratic power must
enjoy independence of ahigh order. But independence
could become dangerous and undemocratic unless there is
a constitutional discipline with rules of good conduct
andaccountability: without these, the robes may prove arrogant.
Failure on part of the legislative and executive wings of the
Government toprovide good governance makes judicial activism
an imperative. Delivering justice to a population of over a billion
does not sound like and never will bean easy task. It however
becomes increasingly difficult in a country like
India. The Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary are the thre
e wings of theIndian democracy.

The Court is made the monitor of the conduct of investigating and

prosecution agencies wh o are per ceived to hav e failed
or neglected toinvestigate and prosecute ministers and
officials of government. Cases of this type are
the investigation and prosecution of ministers and
officialsbelieved to be involved in the Jain Hawala case, the
fodder scam involvingthe former Chief Minister of Bihar, Lalu
Prasad Yadav, the Taj Corridor
caseinvolving the fo rmer Chief Minist er of Uttar Prades
h, May awati, and therecent prosecution of the Telecom
Minister and officials in the 2G Telecomscam case by the
Supreme Court.