Research Paper Sample 1

BBA LLB HONS.

10 November 2017

Judicial Overreach in India

We know that Judicial activism is known to be the political contrivance that is

used to furnish justice to the aggrieved. Not every political agenda is propagated

in a fruitful manner and sufferings are bore by mankind. When the incapable

abode of people, suffers theoretic and political manipulations or when the

execution of juridical welfare fails to serve mankind, judicial activism takes the

lead and accurate propaganda reach the edifices. Public fury, at the very outset,

has somewhere evolved as a result of poor democratic processes. Judicial activism

has been made an imperative as good governance dig up the way in the legislative

and executive stance. Since judicial collegium is home for political acclamation

but as they say “there's always a room for improvement” and that adage serves as

global truth or let us correct ourselves, it serves as a political truth. We see steps,

struggles, consequences and hazards. Yes! The best always comes in a wrap of

consequences. Every battle, whether political or not, might have suffered some or

the other consequences. As Ramesh Thakur once quoted “ If the courts do wish to

be activist, they have more than enough of an agenda within their spheres of

activity without encroaching on legislative and executive jurisdictions” but is it a

solution to be quoted. Technically let us throw some light on political and juridical

aspects of judicial activism and overreach and let them be bifurcated. The line

between both the expressions is quite narrow. Judicial activism when transcends

the judicial blockade, becomes judicial overreach. When judiciary outreach the

ascendancy provided to it, judicial overreach comes in being. But who decides the

extent as to which a judicial interference is alright. Or if we simply state this so

Research Paper Sample 2

how can we measure the technicalities and circumstances of such judicial

encroachment? Not always can someone be jurisdictively accurate and if we

measure it down with an entirely different approach of human conscience, then

whole of the history might become questionable and that too up to an exceptional

level of conflicting stands. But as we all have experienced, that even moon has

scars, humanistic approach is yet an alter able state. Some commonly challenged

or criticised decisions often turns out mind up and down. Everyone can recall the

recent order passed by Allahabad High Court, making it compulsory for all

bureaucrats to send their children to government schools. Many of the high class

bureaucrats might not be happy and welcomed the order, though many commoners

might have extracted hopes for their young budding bureaucrats. Or if we talk

about Supreme Court banning liquor at retail outlets. Where is the encroachment?

Well! These are some recent issues and are more of some fancy pronouncements.

What about those historical pronouncements that once spoke about universal

liberalism or national importance. Can we really step forward, without taking into

consideration the reforms that now are celebrated as matters of national

importance and are nationwide popular but once came out of this overreaching

revolution on political and jurisdictive aspects? No. We can't inadvertently

neglect that. Though sometimes we have big issues falling in front of us where

such sort of overreach or encroachment is questionable and literally should be

questioned as well. But, generalities are not rulings. Different eyes have different

perspectives for a single picturesque, different minds have different decisions for

a common situation and different circumstances have different reasonings. Faizan

Mustafa once highlighted something very important. The reasoning of the original

write up shall not appeal to many or might appeal differently to different people.
Research Paper Sample 3

Inculcating patriotism appeals differently to us. For me patriotism is not “choice”

for some it might be. Some literally fight for the idea of inculcating patriotism,

even if it is done under court orders. My motherland didn't choose whether to raise

me or not. So I don't have any right to consult my procrastinating head regarding

the very idea of respecting and saluting the national flag. It means, that Madras

High Court on promoting patriotism has not overreach or encroached the judicial

barriers by making it compulsory to sing national song. But, these

pronouncements are not really strong enough to be quoted as overreach. Yes!

Defying my initial stand, I shall now highlight some real issues of judicial

overreach and that shall literally change the way we take political, economical,

technical or judicial overreach into consideration. If we take Triple Talaq into our

juridical consideration and critically examine the decisions and theories taken into

mind while bringing it in to being, the very question that still revolved in the

unchallenged dimensions of personage is, “Whether it literally is the domain of a

judicial body to discard or uphold a religious practice and if it is, how?” where

Tanima Kishore strongly questions the courts that after refusing the

criminalisation and decriminalisation of heinous practice such as marital rape and

personal practice such as homosexuality respectively, how come can take such

decisions so proactively.

Judicial overreach is a contemporary issue that highlights different dimensions of

our governing system. Democracy is challenging and it clearly defines the

prospects and human apprehensions relatively. Where one decision brings change

and at the same time can also be termed as some sort of encroachment. Overreach

is nothing more than a tangent, which can last long and in an entirely different

abode as well.
Research Paper Sample 4