Podcast
The Supreme Court of India is the guardian of the Constitution and the ultimate interpreter of laws. Over the years, its landmark judgments have significantly shaped Indian society, contributing not only to legal precedents but also to broader societal change. These rulings have impacted citizens’ lives, governance, and the balance of power between the judiciary, legislature, and executive. Landmark judgments act as beacons that influence policy, protect rights, and ensure justice in a diverse and evolving society like India.
Protecting Fundamental Rights
The most significant contribution of the Supreme Court to Indian society is the protection of fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution. Landmark judgments reinforce these rights and act as safeguards against any arbitrary state actions. One of the most notable cases is Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), where the Court expanded the interpretation of Article 21, which guarantees the right to life and personal liberty. The judgment held that the right to life includes the right to live with dignity, thereby broadening the scope of human rights in India.
This case is often cited as a turning point where the Supreme Court embraced a more activist role, moving beyond mere procedural rights to encompass substantive rights such as privacy and personal dignity. Jurist Upendra Baxi remarked that this judgment established the “liberalization of human rights jurisprudence” in India, giving citizens an empowered role in their relationship with the state.
Balancing the Power of Government
Another vital role of the Supreme Court is maintaining the checks and balances among the different arms of government. The Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) case is perhaps the most significant example of this. In this judgment, the Court propounded the Basic Structure Doctrine, which holds that the Parliament cannot alter the “basic structure” of the Constitution, even through amendments.
This judgment fortified India’s democracy by ensuring that certain foundational principles, such as the rule of law, secularism, and the separation of powers, cannot be compromised. Constitutional scholar H.M. Seervai lauded this judgment as a pivotal moment that “saved Indian democracy from the threat of parliamentary overreach.”
Addressing Social Justice
The Supreme Court has also played a key role in addressing issues of social justice. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997), a landmark judgment, laid down guidelines to prevent sexual harassment at the workplace, filling a legislative vacuum. The Court invoked international conventions to assert that in the absence of domestic legislation, the judiciary must ensure justice by applying global standards.
This judgment marked a significant step toward gender equality in India. As legal scholar Bina Agarwal noted, Vishaka symbolized how the judiciary can “remedy social wrongs and set the wheels of societal transformation in motion,” even in areas where legislative action may be delayed.
Fostering Environmental Awareness
Environmental protection has gained prominence in recent decades, and the Supreme Court has been instrumental in shaping environmental jurisprudence. The M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1986) case, related to the Oleum gas leak, saw the Supreme Court introducing the concept of absolute liability for industries engaged in hazardous activities.
This judgment has had a profound impact on environmental protection in India, holding industries strictly liable for any harm caused to the environment or public health. Environmental lawyer Mahesh Chandra Mehta, after whom the case was named, emphasized that the judgment “transformed environmental law in India and provided a robust framework for protecting citizens from industrial pollution.”
Upholding Constitutional Morality
The Supreme Court’s decisions often reflect the principles of constitutional morality, which seeks to uphold the core values of the Constitution in the face of societal pressures. The Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018) case, which decriminalized homosexuality by striking down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, is a striking example. The Court recognized that societal morality is often at odds with constitutional values and ruled that the rights of individuals, especially marginalized communities, cannot be subjected to majoritarian views.
The judgment was hailed globally for upholding human dignity and individual freedoms. Constitutional expert Granville Austin had earlier argued that constitutional morality requires the judiciary to interpret laws not merely by their text but by their spirit, a principle that this judgment embodied.
Judicial Activism and Social Change
Landmark judgments have also sparked debates on judicial activism, where the Court takes a proactive role in societal matters. Critics argue that the judiciary sometimes encroaches upon the domain of the legislature. However, cases like I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab (1967), which limited Parliament’s power to amend fundamental rights, and Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980), which reinforced the Basic Structure Doctrine, highlight how judicial activism has often acted as a necessary check on legislative overreach.
According to Justice P.N. Bhagwati, who is often credited with pioneering judicial activism in India, the courts have a duty to “step in where the other branches of government fail to protect the rights of citizens or to uphold the constitutional mandate.”
Conclusion
The importance of landmark Supreme Court judgments in Indian society cannot be overstated. They are not mere interpretations of the law; they are milestones that reflect the evolving aspirations of society and act as catalysts for social change. These rulings uphold the Constitution, protect individual rights, address issues of inequality, and maintain a balance of power within the democratic framework. As India continues to face new challenges, the judiciary’s role in shaping the future remains as critical as ever.
The Supreme Court’s judgments remind us that the law is not static; it evolves to meet the needs of the people and the times. As constitutional theorist Nani Palkhivala famously said, “The Constitution is not a parchment of paper, but a vehicle of life for a civilized society.” These landmark rulings demonstrate how the judiciary breathes life into the Constitution, making it relevant to contemporary Indian society.
Related Posts-
Features
8 Months
