Critics Decry “Judicial Overreach,” While Supporters Hail Proactive Stance on Governance
New Delhi, March 29, 2025 — India’s judiciary, long regarded as a guardian of constitutional rights, is increasingly facing scrutiny for its assertive interventions in policy-making and governance—a trend that has ignited a heated debate over the separation of powers in the world’s largest democracy.
From Bystander to Activist: A Shift in Judicial Approach
Traditionally, Indian courts have exercised judicial review to check legislative and executive actions. However, recent years have seen the Supreme Court and High Courts adopting a more proactive stance, issuing directives on issues ranging from environmental regulation to public health and religious customs.
Landmark cases highlight this shift. In 2015, the Supreme Court struck down the National Judicial Appointments Commission (NJAC), a body meant to involve the executive in judicial appointments, asserting the judiciary’s independence. More recently, courts mandated COVID-19 oxygen supply protocols, criticized vaccine distribution strategies, and monitored air pollution measures in Delhi. In 2018, the Supreme Court’s Sabarimala verdict, allowing women of all ages to enter a Kerala temple, stirred controversy by intervening in religious tradition.
Government Pushback and Accusations of Overreach
The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)-led government has openly criticized what it calls “judicial adventurism.” Former Law Minister Kiren Rijiju previously argued that courts risked overstepping into “executive domains,” undermining elected authorities. Similar concerns emerged after the Supreme Court’s 2023 hearings on electoral bonds, demanding transparency in political funding—a move some lawmakers labeled as encroachment on legislative prerogatives.
Critics, including legal scholar Gautam Bhatia, caution that while judicial review is vital, “micromanaging governance erodes democratic accountability.” A 2022 report by the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy noted a 40% rise in court directives on policy matters since 2019, raising questions about institutional boundaries.
Judiciary Defends Role as “Last Resort” for Rights
The judiciary, however, maintains that its interventions address governmental inertia. Former Chief Justice N.V. Ramana stated in 2022, “When executive and legislative bodies falter, courts cannot remain silent spectators.” Supporters point to the COVID-19 crisis, where court orders expedited oxygen supplies and vaccine equity, saving lives amid administrative delays.
Civil society groups also applaud rulings on environmental protections, such as enforcing Delhi’s Odd-Even vehicle policy to curb pollution, and decriminalizing homosexuality in 2018. “The courts step in precisely when other institutions fail,” said activist Anjali Bhardwaj.
Legal Experts Urge Delicate Balance
Constitutional experts emphasize the need for restraint. Senior advocate Arvind Datar noted, “Judicial activism is a double-edged sword. It can protect rights but also destabilize institutional harmony.” Former Supreme Court Justice Madan Lokur warned that overreach risks “politicizing the judiciary,” while others stress that Article 142—empowering courts to pass orders in the “complete justice” spirit—must be used sparingly.
Conclusion: A Democracy at a Crossroads
As India grapples with complex socio-political challenges, the judiciary’s expanding footprint underscores a tension inherent in democratic governance: ensuring accountability without usurping elected mandates. With the Supreme Court poised to hear cases on digital privacy, climate policy, and electoral reforms, the debate over judicial boundaries is far from settled.
For now, the nation watches as its courts navigate the thin line between activism and overreach—a balancing act that will shape India’s democratic fabric for years to come.
News has been collaborated via various available data available on the internet, quoted data is of individual / Media Houses.
No copyright infringement intended & if any should be intimated & due credit will be incorporated in the article.