Maharashtra Board Class 11 Political Science Chapter 6 Role of the Judiciary Solutions

1A. Choose the Correct Alternative and Complete the Following Statements.

Question 1. ___________ is the first country to create independent judiciary.
(a) India
(b) United States
(c) United Kingdom
(d) Soviet Union
Answer: (b) United States
In simple words: The United States was the first nation to make its courts completely separate and free from the control of the government's other branches.

🎯 Exam Tip: Remember that the US Constitution pioneered the concept of a strict separation of powers, which includes an independent judiciary to protect citizens' rights.

Question 2. The primary function of the judiciary is ___________ (making laws, executing laws, adjudication, make appointments)
Answer: adjudication. This means the courts interpret the law and resolve legal disputes between parties.
In simple words: The main job of the courts is to judge cases and decide who is right according to the law.

🎯 Exam Tip: Remember that while the legislature makes laws and the executive implements them, the judiciary's role is to resolve disputes through adjudication.

1B. Identify the Incorrect Pair in Every Set, Correct it and Rewrite.

Question 1.
(a) Written Constitution – India
(b) Judicial Review – United Kingdom
(c) Independent Judiciary – United States
Answer: (b) Judicial Review – USA. The United Kingdom does not have a system of judicial review in the same way as the United States because of parliamentary sovereignty.
In simple words: In the UK, Parliament is supreme, so courts cannot easily cancel laws. The power of judicial review is a key feature of the US legal system.

🎯 Exam Tip: Always write both the incorrect pair and the corrected version clearly to secure full marks in this question type.

1C. State the Appropriate Concept for the Given Statement.

Question 1. Petition regarding important public concerns.
Answer: Public Interest Litigation (PIL). This legal mechanism allows any citizen or group to file a case in court for the protection of public interest.
In simple words: A PIL is a special case filed in court to protect the rights and well-being of the general public.

🎯 Exam Tip: Write the full form along with the abbreviation (PIL) to show a complete understanding of the concept.

Question 2. The process of removal of judges.
Answer: Impeachment. This is a formal legislative process used to remove high-ranking officials, including judges, for proven misbehavior or incapacity.
In simple words: Impeachment is the special process used by parliament to remove a judge from their position if they do wrong.

🎯 Exam Tip: Use the precise term 'Impeachment' as it is the specific constitutional word for removing judges.

Question 3. Cases can be heard for the first time only in certain courts.
Answer: Original Jurisdiction. This refers to the power of a court to hear a case for the very first time, rather than on appeal.
In simple words: Original jurisdiction means a court has the authority to be the first one to hear and decide a case.

🎯 Exam Tip: Differentiate clearly between original jurisdiction and appellate jurisdiction to avoid confusion.

2. Complete the Concept Map.

Question 1. Complete the concept map showing the different types of Writs:
Answer: The five types of writs are:
• Habeas Corpus
• Mandamus
• Certiorari
• Prohibition
• Quo Warranto
These writs are powerful legal tools used by courts to protect the fundamental rights of citizens.
In simple words: Writs are special orders issued by a court to protect people's rights and make sure the government and lower courts follow the law.

🎯 Exam Tip: Memorize all five types of writs as they are frequently asked in exams, and try to write down their basic meanings to secure full marks.

3. State Whether the Following Statements are True or False with Reasons.

Question 1. There is no need to approve the appointment of judges by the Senate in the United States.
Answer: This statement is False.
• The Judges of the Supreme Court of America and the courts subordinate to it are appointed by the President of the USA.
• These appointments can be confirmed only after the Senate gives its approval. This system of checks and balances ensures that the executive branch does not have absolute power over judicial appointments.
In simple words: The statement is false because the President of the USA cannot appoint judges alone. The Senate must vote and approve these appointments before they become official.

🎯 Exam Tip: When answering True/False questions with reasons, always state clearly whether the statement is True or False first, then provide at least two supporting points.

Question 2. In India judiciary is independent.
Answer: This statement is True.
• Provisions for judicial independence are provided in the Indian Constitution.
• This includes provisions related to appointment, tenure, salary, and allowances, removal from office, etc., of judges so that the judiciary acts in a free and fair manner. This independence ensures that the judiciary remains impartial and unaffected by political pressure from the legislature or executive.
In simple words: The statement is true because India's Constitution has special rules to protect judges from political pressure, allowing them to make fair decisions without fear.

🎯 Exam Tip: Highlight key terms like "Indian Constitution" and "free and fair manner" to show the examiner you understand the constitutional basis of judicial independence.

Explain the Co-relation Between the Following.

Question 1. Judiciary and Executive.
Answer: The judiciary and executive are both organs of the government. The main function of the executive is the implementation of laws and policies while the functions of the judiciary include interpretation of law and adjudication. In India, judges are appointed by the President (nominal executive). Traditionally, these appointments were made after consulting with the existing government (ministry). However, to maintain judicial independence, the collegium of judges recommends names for appointment to the President. This system of checks and balances prevents any single branch from becoming too powerful. There are many instances where the executive is a party to a dispute either as the plaintiff or as the defendant. Given the power of the Government, any legal dispute between it and one or more citizens is usually unequal. There is a possibility that the Government would use its powers to secure a favourable decision. This is where the independence of the Judiciary becomes important. An independent judiciary ensures that all those who appear before it is treated on an equal plane, and thus makes sure that decisions are in accordance with the law.
In simple words: The executive implements laws, while the judiciary interprets them and resolves disputes. An independent judiciary is necessary so that the government cannot use its power to influence court decisions unfairly.

🎯 Exam Tip: Clearly define the distinct roles of both organs and explain why judicial independence is crucial for maintaining a fair democracy.

Question 2. Supreme Court and High Court.
Answer: India has a single integrated judicial system, with the Supreme Court at the apex and followed by the High Courts in the States. The Supreme Court controls all courts and tribunals in the territory of India. The High Court controls and supervises the functioning of the subordinate courts e.g., District Courts, in its territorial jurisdiction. The High Courts have Appellate jurisdiction, regarding decisions of the lower courts while Supreme Court can hear appeals in civil, criminal, and constitutional cases against decisions of the High Courts. This hierarchical structure ensures that justice is accessible at multiple levels across the nation. Supreme Court has original Jurisdiction such as in disputes about the election of the President or Vice-President which are its exclusive jurisdiction. Both, Supreme Court and High Court have Writ Jurisdiction i.e., they can issue directives or writs such as Habeas Corpus in case of violation of a person’s fundamental rights.
In simple words: The Supreme Court is the highest court in the country, and High Courts are the top courts in each state. They work together in a single system to handle appeals and protect citizens' basic rights.

🎯 Exam Tip: Remember to mention that India has an integrated judicial system and highlight shared powers like Writ Jurisdiction to secure maximum marks.

5. Express Your Opinion of the Following.

Question 1. Judiciary must have a leading role in the appointment of judges.
Answer: One of the main ways to secure judicial independence relates to the appointment of the judges. A judiciary that works under government favour, fear, or pressure i.e., a ‘committed judiciary’ can never give impartial, fair decisions especially when the government is a party in any dispute. The judges of the Supreme Court and High Courts are appointed by the President of India who is expected to be politically neutral. However, according to the 42nd Amendment Act, the President acts on the aid and advice of the Union Ministry. Hence, executive interference in judicial appointments is a real possibility. Since the 1990s, the Supreme Court ruled that the Judiciary must play a leading role in its judicial appointments. The Supreme Court set up a Collegium consisting of the Chief Justice of India and the four senior-most judges of the court which would recommend names to the President for appointment to the Supreme Court and the High Courts. This ensures that the judiciary remains a strong and independent pillar of democracy. The Government’s role in this process has now been minimized.
In simple words: To make sure judges are fair and not influenced by politicians, the judiciary itself should have the main say in choosing new judges. This keeps the courts independent and honest.

🎯 Exam Tip: Always mention the role of the 'Collegium' and the need for judicial independence to secure full marks in this answer.

Question 2. Judicial activism is significant today.
Answer: Judiciary in India has started taking a wider view of its functions. For instance, the courts have allowed individuals to file petitions on matters of important public concern. Such cases are known as Public Interest Litigation (PILs). There have been instances where the courts of their own accord, without anyone complaining or filing a petition, have taken note of matters of public concern (Suo moto). This proactive approach helps protect the rights of common citizens when other branches of government fail to act. This wider view taken by the Judiciary of its functions has been termed as ‘Judicial Activism’.
In simple words: Judicial activism means courts taking action on their own or through public petitions to solve important social problems. It helps protect citizens when other government departments are slow to act.

🎯 Exam Tip: Clearly define 'Public Interest Litigation (PIL)' and 'Suo Moto' as these are key terms examiners look for.

In recent years, Judicial Activism has led to the courts examining the legality of the decision of the executive over a wide variety of issues including the ones referred to above. Moreover, in many instances, they have also either issued orders on what should be done over many issues or have directed the executive to take action about the same in a specified time period.

There has been much debate over Judicial Activism. Some feel that the judiciary was compelled to intervene because the executive was not discharging its functions properly, while others believe that the courts are exceeding their powers by looking into matters which fall within the jurisdiction of the executive or legislative.

Answer the Following in Detail with Reference to the Given Points.

Question 1. Explain the process of Judicial Review?
(a) Meaning
(b) Need
(c) When and where it started
(d) Indian context
Answer:
(a) Meaning: Judicial Review means the power of the Judiciary to examine if any law passed by the legislature or any executive policy or action is consistent with the Constitution or not, and if it is not then to declare it as unconstitutional and hence null and void. This crucial power ensures that the fundamental law of the land remains supreme.
(b) Need: It becomes necessary to have an institution that would examine whether the laws are consistent with the Constitution or not. That institution should also have the power to declare any law found inconsistent with the Constitution to be invalid and therefore not to be implemented. This would prevent the Legislature from making laws that violate the Constitution. In democracies with written Constitutions, this power is vested in the Judiciary. The Judiciary is not involved in any way in the law-making process. It is an independent body. Hence it has been assigned this power.
In simple words: Judicial Review is the power of courts to check if laws and government actions follow the Constitution. If a law goes against the Constitution, the court can cancel it to protect the country's supreme laws.

🎯 Exam Tip: Clearly define the term 'Judicial Review' and explain why an independent judiciary is necessary to protect the Constitution from being violated by other branches of government.

(c) When and Where it Started: The origins of the power of Judicial Review can be traced to a decision of the Supreme Court of the United States of America given in 1803 in a case known as the Marbury vs Madison case. This was for the first time that the American Supreme Court declared a law passed by the United States Congress to be invalid on the grounds that it was inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States. However, it must be noted that the American Constitution does not have an explicit provision that gives the Judiciary the power of Judicial Review. It is an implied power. To date, the American Supreme Court’s power of Judicial Review has been unchallenged. This is so because it is accepted that such a power is necessary to retain the supremacy of the Constitution.

(d) Indian Context: The Constitution of India does not explicitly provide the judiciary with the power of Judicial Review. However, like in the United States, these powers are implied. The Supreme Court of India has on many occasions declared laws passed by the Legislature as being inconsistent with the Constitution and therefore unconstitutional. In the Indian context, the real issue has been whether the amendments to the Constitution can be held unconstitutional. The issue was settled by the Supreme Court in the Kesavananda Bharati case (1973). In its judgment, the Court stated that the Constitution of India had a ‘Basic Structure’. The Constitutional Amendments passed by the Parliament have to be consistent with this ‘Basic Structure’, and if they are found to be not, then the Supreme Court would declare them unconstitutional. The power to declare any Amendments as unconstitutional rests only with the Supreme Court.

Activity (Text Book Page No. 52)

Question. Make a list of examples of Judicial Activism in India.
Answer: Judicial Activism refers to the active role of the judiciary in upholding the rights of citizens and preserving constitutional provisions and the legal system of the country. The judiciary takes an active part wherever the legislature of executive fails to perform its duty, especially to dispense social justice. In India, this proactive approach has helped address many public grievances directly.

Some areas of judicial activism include:
• Reforming the BCCI even though it is a private body.
• The Supreme Court insisting on a collegium of judges to suggest names for elevation as judges to the High/Supreme courts.
• Protection of the ecosystem and environmental jurisprudence.
In simple words: Judicial activism is when courts step in to protect people's rights and make sure laws are followed when other parts of the government fail to do their jobs.

🎯 Exam Tip: When defining judicial activism, always mention key examples like environmental protection or BCCI reforms to show a practical understanding of the concept.

• In regard to the Bhopal Gas Tragedy (1984).
• Conduct NEET exam all over the country.
• The right to privacy is a part of a fundamental right.
• Improving conditions of undertrials.