The Supreme Court, as the highest judicial authority in India, is entrusted with safeguarding and interpreting the Constitution. Among its various responsibilities, its role as the “guardian” of fundamental rights and the rule of law stands out prominently. This responsibility, rooted in Article 37 of the Indian Constitution, is vital to the country’s legal and governance framework. To understand the Supreme Court’s guardianship under Article 37, it is essential to explore its constitutional duties, judicial review powers, and how it ensures the protection of fundamental rights.
Understanding Article 37:
Article 37 is part of the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs) under Part IV of the Indian Constitution. While fundamental rights in Part III are enforceable by courts, the provisions in Part IV serve as guidelines for governance and policymaking but are not legally binding. Article 37 explicitly states:
“The provisions contained in this Part shall not be enforceable by any court, but the principles therein laid down are nevertheless fundamental in the governance of the country, and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making laws.”
This provision underscores that while Directive Principles lack legal enforceability, they remain vital to the nation’s governance. Article 37 also emphasizes the Supreme Court’s crucial role in interpreting and balancing these principles with enforceable constitutional rights.
Supreme Court: Protector of Fundamental Rights
The Supreme Court’s primary role as outlined in Articles 32 and 37 is to protect the fundamental rights guaranteed in Part III of the Constitution. These rights—such as equality, freedom of speech, and protection from arbitrary actions—form the backbone of India’s democratic structure. While Directive Principles represent aspirational goals for governance, fundamental rights are legally enforceable, ensuring that the State and other entities cannot infringe upon them.
Through Article 32, individuals can directly approach the Supreme Court to seek protection if their fundamental rights are violated. This unique feature highlights the Court’s pivotal role as a protector of justice and liberty.
In a democracy, protecting individual rights is essential. While governments enact laws for societal welfare, these can occasionally infringe upon rights, either unintentionally or otherwise. In such situations, the Supreme Court steps in to ensure that the Constitution—the highest law in the land—is upheld and that fundamental freedoms remain inviolable.
Judicial Review: Core to Guardianship
Judicial review is at the heart of the Supreme Court’s role as a guardian. This power allows the judiciary to assess whether laws enacted by the legislature or actions by the executive comply with the Constitution. When a law or action is challenged, the Court determines its constitutionality, particularly concerning fundamental rights.
While the Constitution does not explicitly mention judicial review, it was established in the U.S. through Marbury v. Madison (1803) and later adopted in India. The landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) firmly established the Supreme Court’s power to strike down unconstitutional laws, particularly those infringing fundamental rights. Judicial review thus remains an essential tool for upholding the rule of law and individual freedoms.
Balancing Fundamental Rights and Directive Principles
Although fundamental rights are legally enforceable, Directive Principles provide a vision for achieving social, economic, and political justice. Article 37 ensures that while Directive Principles are non-justiciable, they remain fundamental in guiding the State’s policies.
The Supreme Court has emphasized the importance of harmonizing fundamental rights and Directive Principles. For instance, in Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980), the Court highlighted the need to balance individual rights with social justice goals. This judgment reinforced the idea that fundamental rights and Directive Principles should work in unison to achieve the Constitution’s overarching vision.
Through its judgments, the Court has expanded the interpretation of fundamental rights to incorporate principles from the Directive Principles. For example, Article 21 (Right to Life) has been interpreted to include the right to education, clean air, and a healthy environment, thereby addressing contemporary societal needs.
Landmark Judgments Illustrating the Supreme Court’s Role
1. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): The Court broadened the scope of Article 21, ruling that the right to life includes the right to live with dignity. This judgment showcased the Supreme Court’s commitment to interpreting fundamental rights expansively.
2. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): The basic structure doctrine was introduced, safeguarding core constitutional features such as democracy, fundamental freedoms, and the rule of law from being altered through amendments.
3. Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985): The Court recognized the right to livelihood as part of the right to life under Article 21, emphasizing the importance of dignity and socio-economic rights.
Addressing Contemporary Challenges
The Supreme Court has increasingly addressed modern challenges such as environmental degradation, human rights violations, and communal conflicts. By using judicial review, the Court has directed the government to prioritize environmental conservation, protect marginalized groups, and uphold social justice. For instance, it has issued directives to safeguard forests, rivers, and wildlife, reinforcing the constitutional vision of sustainability.
The Court’s proactive stance ensures that governance evolves to meet emerging issues while maintaining constitutional values. Its judgments often promote equality, justice, and human dignity, embodying the principles enshrined in Directive Principles.
Conclusion
As a guardian under Article 37, the Supreme Court’s role in upholding fundamental rights and guiding the implementation of Directive Principles is vital to the Indian Constitution’s framework. Through judicial review, balanced interpretations, and dynamic judgments, the Court ensures that the Constitution remains adaptable to societal changes. Its vigilant guardianship not only safeguards individual liberties but also promotes the broader goals of social and economic justice. By continually upholding the rule of law, the Supreme Court reinforces its position as the protector of India’s democratic and constitutional ethos.
Best Lawfirm in lucknow for Corporate Cases | Best Crimimal Lawyers Near me | Best Criminal Advocates Near me | Best Corporate Advocates Near Me | Best Criminal Lawyers in Lucknow High Court | Best Corporate Lawyers in Lucknow High Court | Best Lawfirm in Uttar Pradesh | Best Criminal Advocates in Uttar Pradesh | Best Advocates in Lucknow High Court | Best Lawyers in Lucknow High Court | Best Lawfirm in Lucknow High Court | Best Legal Advisor in Lucknow | Best Legal Consultant in Lucknow | Best lawfirm for legal Consultancy services in lucknow
Indian Constitution, https://www.indiacode.nic.in (Last visited Jan. 7, 2025). https://saslawchambers.com
Supreme Court of India, https://www.sci.gov.in (last visited Jan. 7, 2025).
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) 4 SCC 225 https://saslawchambers.com
Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980) 3 SCC 625.
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248.
Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985) 3 SCC 545.
Jain, M.P. (2021) Indian Constitutional Law. 8th edn. Gurgaon: LexisNexis. https://saslawchambers.com