Class 11 Political Science Chapter 6 Judiciary Important Questions with Answers

प्र. What is the rule of law?

उत्तर: The principle that all individuals, rich or poor, men or women, forward or backward castes, are subject to the same law.

प्र. State one meaning of independence of the judiciary.

उत्तर: Other organs of government (the executive and legislature) must not interfere with the judiciary’s decisions.

प्र. What is judicial review?

उत्तर: The power of the Supreme Court (or a High Court) to declare a law unconstitutional if it is inconsistent with the Constitution.

प्र. Give one example of original jurisdiction.

उत्तर: A dispute between the Union and a State, or between two States, heard directly by the Supreme Court.

प्र. What is Public Interest Litigation (PIL)?

उत्तर: A petition filed on behalf of an aggrieved person by someone else (a lawyer, an organisation), especially for those who cannot approach the courts themselves.

प्र. In which year was the Kesavananda Bharati case decided?

उत्तर: 1973

प्र. What is the only ground for removing a judge?

उत्तर: Proven misbehaviour or incapacity.

प्र. What is the difference between Article 32 and Article 226?

उत्तर: Article 32 empowers the Supreme Court, and Article 226 the High Courts, to issue writs restoring Fundamental Rights.

प्र. Give two measures that ensure the independence of the judiciary.

उत्तर: 1. Judges’ appointments do not involve the legislature, so party politics cannot influence them.
2. Judges have a fixed tenure and security of tenure, they can be removed only in exceptional cases.

प्र. How was the CJI appointment convention broken, twice?

उत्तर: The senior-most-judge convention was set aside twice: in 1973 the Supreme Court’s three most senior judges were passed over in favour of A.N. Ray, and in 1975 H.R. Khanna was passed over in favour of M.H. Beg.

प्र. Why did the motion to remove Justice V. Ramaswami fail?

उत्तर: The motion got the required two-thirds majority among members present and voting, but the Congress party abstained from voting, so it could not get the support of one-half of the total strength of the House.

प्र. Briefly explain the pyramidal structure of India’s judiciary.

उत्तर: The Supreme Court sits at the top, its decisions binding on all courts. Below it are the High Courts, and at the base are the District and subordinate courts, which function under the direct superintendence of the courts above them.

प्र. Name two writs and briefly explain them.

उत्तर: 1. Habeas Corpus: an order to produce a person illegally detained before the court.
2. Mandamus: an order directing a government official to perform their duty.

प्र. Briefly describe the Hussainara Khatoon vs. Bihar case.

उत्तर: In 1979, newspapers reported that undertrials in Bihar’s jails had spent longer years in jail than they would have if convicted and sentenced. An advocate, prompted by this report, filed a petition, which became one of the early PILs.

प्र. State one positive and one negative effect of judicial activism.

उत्तर: Positive: it gave both individuals and groups access to the courts.
Negative: it overburdened the courts with cases.

प्र. What did the Supreme Court rule about the right to property in the Kesavananda Bharati case?

उत्तर: The Court ruled that the right to property was not part of the Constitution’s basic structure, and could therefore be suitably abridged.

प्र. Explain the three meanings of independence of the judiciary.

उत्तर: 1. Other organs like the executive and legislature must not restrain the judiciary’s functioning to the point where it cannot do justice.
2. Other organs must not interfere with the judiciary’s decisions.
3. Judges must be able to perform their functions without fear or favour. Independence also does not mean arbitrariness or an absence of accountability, the judiciary remains accountable to the Constitution, democratic traditions, and the people.

प्र. How did the Supreme Court’s view of the CJI’s consultative role in appointments change over time?

उत्तर: 1. Initially, the CJI was only ‘consulted’, with the final decision effectively resting with the Council of Ministers.
2. Between 1982 and 1998, this matter came up before the Supreme Court repeatedly.
3. First, the Court held that the CJI’s role was purely consultative.
4. Then it held that the President must follow the CJI’s opinion.
5. Finally, the Court suggested a new procedure: the CJI would recommend names in consultation with the four senior-most judges of the Court, giving this group of senior judges the greatest weight in appointments.

प्र. Describe the V. Ramaswami case in detail.

उत्तर: 1. In 1991, the first-ever motion to remove a Supreme Court judge was signed by 108 Members of Parliament.
2. Justice V. Ramaswami was accused of misappropriating funds while serving as Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
3. In 1992, an inquiry commission found him guilty of wilful and gross misuse of office and moral turpitude.
4. Despite this strong indictment, the motion got the required two-thirds majority among members present and voting, but the Congress party abstained from voting, so the motion failed to get the support of one-half of the total strength of the House, and Ramaswami was not removed.

प्र. Explain the four kinds of jurisdiction the Supreme Court of India holds.

उत्तर: 1. Original jurisdiction: Union-State and inter-State disputes are heard directly by the Supreme Court.
2. Writ jurisdiction: a person whose fundamental right is violated can move the Supreme Court directly, which can issue writs like Habeas Corpus.
3. Appellate jurisdiction: the Supreme Court can reconsider the decisions of lower courts.
4. Advisory jurisdiction: the President can seek the Supreme Court’s advice on matters of public importance, though neither the Court is bound to advise nor the President bound to accept it.

प्र. How did Public Interest Litigation (PIL) begin, giving two early examples?

उत्तर: 1. Normally, only a personally aggrieved individual could approach the courts, this changed around 1979.
2. Hussainara Khatoon vs. Bihar (1979): prompted by newspaper reports on undertrials in Bihar’s jails, an advocate filed a petition.
3. Sunil Batra vs. Delhi Administration (1980): a Tihar jail inmate sent Justice Krishna Iyer a scribbled note about torture, which the judge converted into a petition.
4. These cases gave PIL its early identity, and later allowed organisations and lawyers to file petitions on behalf of the needy.

प्र. Explain both the positive and negative effects of judicial activism.

उत्तर: Positive: 1. It gave both individuals and groups access to the courts. 2. It increased the executive’s accountability. 3. Candidates contesting elections were required to file affidavits on assets, income and education, making elections fairer.
Negative: 1. It overburdened the courts. 2. It blurred the line between the executive, legislature and judiciary, since the court intervened in matters like pollution, corruption investigation, or electoral reform, which really belong to the executive.

प्र. Explain the three main holdings of the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973).

उत्तर: 1. The Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution has a basic structure, which nobody, not even Parliament through amendment, can violate.
2. The Court also ruled that the right to property (the disputed issue) was not part of the basic structure, and could therefore be suitably abridged.
3. The Court reserved to itself the right to decide whether various matters are part of the Constitution’s basic structure.
4. This case shows how the judiciary uses its power to interpret the Constitution.

प्र. Explain in detail the constitutional provisions that ensure the independence of the judiciary.

उत्तर: 1. Legislature not involved in appointment: this ensures party politics does not influence appointments; a judge needs experience as a lawyer and/or expertise in law, not political loyalty.
2. Fixed tenure and security of tenure: judges hold office until retirement age and can be removed only in exceptional cases, letting them work without fear.
3. Financial independence: judges’ salaries and allowances are not subject to the legislature’s approval.
4. Protection from criticism: judges’ work cannot be personally criticised, the contempt-of-court power protects this, and Parliament cannot discuss judges’ conduct except during removal proceedings.
5. Additionally, the removal procedure itself is made very difficult, requiring a special majority and proven misbehaviour/incapacity, as seen in the V. Ramaswami case.

प्र. Describe the V. Ramaswami case in full, and explain what it reveals about judicial independence.

उत्तर: 1. In 1991, the first-ever motion to remove a Supreme Court judge was signed by 108 Members of Parliament.
2. Justice V. Ramaswami was accused of misappropriating funds while serving as Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
3. In 1992, an inquiry commission found him guilty of wilful and gross misuse of office and moral turpitude.
4. Despite this strong indictment, the motion got two-thirds of members present and voting, but the Congress party’s abstention meant it failed to reach one-half of the total House strength, so Ramaswami was not removed.
5. This case shows how difficult the removal procedure has been made, even overwhelming evidence of wrongdoing was not enough to remove a judge.
6. It highlights both the strength and the potential cost of judicial independence, the strict process built to protect independence can also make accountability difficult.

प्र. Explain the impact of Public Interest Litigation and judicial activism on the Indian political system in detail.

उत्तर: 1. PIL changed the condition for approaching courts, now someone other than the aggrieved person could file on their behalf, an idea that emerged around 1979.
2. Early cases like Hussainara Khatoon (1979) and Sunil Batra (1980) brought issues like undertrials and prisoner torture before the courts.
3. Positive effects: individuals and groups both gained access to courts, executive accountability increased, and candidates filing asset/income/education affidavits made elections fairer.
4. Negative effects: courts became overburdened, and the line between the executive, legislature and judiciary blurred, since courts began deciding matters like pollution, corruption investigation, and electoral reform, which really belong to the executive.
5. Many countries are now adopting PIL, South Africa has even incorporated it into its own bill of rights.
6. Overall, PIL has made the judiciary far more powerful in protecting citizens’ rights, but it has also made the balance among the three organs of government more delicate.

प्र. Explain the background, ruling, and impact on Parliament-judiciary relations of the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973).

उत्तर: 1. As soon as the Constitution came into force, a conflict began between Parliament and the judiciary over the right to property, Parliament wanted to restrict it for land reforms.
2. The Court held Parliament cannot restrict fundamental rights this way; Parliament then tried to amend the Constitution, but the Court held even an amendment cannot abridge a fundamental right.
3. Between 1967 and 1973, this conflict intensified, over land reform, preventive detention and reservation-related laws.
4. In 1973, in the Kesavananda Bharati case, the Supreme Court ruled that the Constitution has a basic structure, which even Parliament cannot alter through amendment.
5. The Court also ruled that the right to property was not part of the basic structure and could be abridged, and reserved to itself the right to decide what counts as basic structure.
6. In 1979, the right to property was removed from the Fundamental Rights list, changing the nature of this conflict, and the basic structure doctrine remains the most important constitutional limit on Parliament’s amending power today.