KSLU Solved Question Papers
Judicial Power and Judicial Process (Hons)
Previous Year Question Paper with Solution
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) · Sem 6
2022 Oct Examination
munotes.in
Mumbai
B.A. LL.B. (Five Years) Sem 6 Judicial Power and Judicial Process (Hons) 2022 Oct Question Paper with Solutions
First published on munotes.in on 2 November 2026.
Published by munotes.in, Mumbai.
Model answers written and edited by the munotes.in editorial desk.
Passages from this volume may be quoted, in print, online or by an AI system, with credit: name munotes.in and link to this volume's page. The volume may not be reproduced as a whole. Full terms at munotes.in/content-license.
munotes.in is an independent study resource for students of Karnataka State Law University. It is not affiliated with Karnataka State Law University, and is not endorsed by it.
The University does not publish an official answer key for this paper. The answers in this volume are model answers, written to show how a full-mark answer is built. They are a study aid, not an authority on what an examiner marked.
The question paper reproduced here is the paper as set by Karnataka State Law University at the 2022 Oct examination.
Contents
The questions below are the paper as Karnataka State Law University set it at the 2022 Oct examination, in the order it was set.
MarksPage
MarksPage
The Paper as Set
The questions in this volume are the questions asked at the 2022 Oct examination, reproduced as Karnataka State Law University set them, in the order it set them. Long reading passages are shortened to their first and last lines and our summary; the original paper prints them in full. Only the answers are ours. See the original question paper.
Duration 2½ hours · Total marks 70 · 12 questions answered
How to use this volume
Solve the paper first, under exam conditions and against the clock. Then read the answers here and mark your own. Reading a solution before attempting the question feels productive and teaches very little, because recognising an answer is not the same as being able to write one.
Q1What is judicial activism ? Discuss emerging dimensions of judicial activism in India.[10]
Answer
For full marks, cover: the meaning of judicial activism and its contrast with judicial restraint; its constitutional basis (Articles 32, 142 and 226); its varieties; its growth in India through public interest litigation (S.P. Gupta v. President of India, Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan); the emerging dimensions (Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India, Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms); the structural challenges and the limits (State of Uttaranchal v. Balwant Singh Chaufal); and a conclusion.
Meaning
Judicial activism is an approach in which a court, within its established jurisdiction, takes an expansive view of its role. It reads rights broadly, relaxes procedural barriers to access, devises new remedies, and is willing to direct the other organs of the State. It is contrasted with judicial restraint, where the court decides on the narrowest ground and defers to the legislature and executive within their spheres.
Constitutional basis
- Article 32: the right to move the Supreme Court to enforce fundamental rights, itself a fundamental right.
- Article 226: the High Courts' power to issue writs "for any other purpose".
- Article 142: the Supreme Court may make any order necessary for "complete justice".
Varieties
- Interpretive: wider meaning for existing words, as with Article 21.
- Procedural: wider access, through public interest litigation and letters treated as petitions.
- Remedial: new remedies, such as guidelines and compensation.
- Structural: rearranging public power, as in judicial appointments.
- Juristic: developing doctrine beyond what a case needs.
How it grew in India
S.P. Gupta v. President of India, AIR 1982 SC 149. Held: where a legal wrong is done to persons who cannot approach the court because of poverty or disability, "any member of the public" may move the court for them. This opened the door to public interest litigation.
Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, AIR 1979 SC 1360. Held: a procedure that keeps large numbers of undertrial prisoners in jail without trial for long cannot be reasonable, just or fair. Speedy trial is implicit in Article 21, and the undertrials were ordered released on personal bonds.
Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation, AIR 1986 SC 180. Held: the right to life in Article 21 includes the right to livelihood, "because, no person can live without the means of living". Pavement dwellers had to be heard before eviction.
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011. Held: with no law on sexual harassment at work, the Court framed guidelines drawn from international conventions to enforce Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21. They bound everyone until Parliament legislated.
The emerging dimensions
1. Privacy and informational autonomy. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1. Held: nine judges held that privacy is protected as an intrinsic part of life and personal liberty under Article 21. It is also part of the freedoms in Part III. Earlier decisions denying it were overruled.
2. Personal autonomy and constitutional morality. Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, (2018) 10 SCC 1. Held: section 377 of the Penal Code, so far as it criminalised consensual acts of adults in private, violated Articles 14, 15, 19 and 21. Constitutional morality, not majority sentiment, governs fundamental rights.
3. Environmental governance. Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum v. Union of India, AIR 1996 SC 2715. Held: the precautionary principle and the polluter pays principle are part of the law of the land. The Court moved from deciding disputes to supervising whole regulatory fields.
4. Electoral transparency. Union of India v. Association for Democratic Reforms, AIR 2002 SC 2112. Held: voters have a right to know the criminal record and assets of candidates, flowing from Article 19(1)(a). The Court acted because the field had been left unoccupied.
5. Dignity in dying. The Court has held that dignity extends to the process of dying and has framed guidelines on advance medical directives until Parliament legislates.
6. Continuing supervision, where the Court retains a matter for years and issues periodic directions.
Structural challenges and limits
- Arrears and vacancies: a court with a vast backlog spends scarce time on policy.
- The enforcement gap: directions depend on an administration the court does not command.
- Separation of powers: courts must not run the government.
State of Uttaranchal v. Balwant Singh Chaufal, (2010) 3 SCC 402. Held: reviewing the history of public interest litigation, the Court directed High Courts to frame rules encouraging genuine petitions and discouraging frivolous ones. Petitioners' credentials must be verified, and frivolous petitions met with exemplary costs.
Assessment
Activism has made rights real for prisoners, workers, women and the poor. Its legitimacy depends on restraint: acting where rights are at stake and other organs have failed, and giving reasons.
Conclusion. Judicial activism is a court going beyond the minimum to make rights effective, through Articles 32, 142 and 226. It began with access and new rights (S.P. Gupta, Hussainara Khatoon, Olga Tellis, Vishaka). Its emerging dimensions are privacy, autonomy, environment, electoral transparency and continuing supervision (Puttaswamy, Navtej, Vellore, ADR). Balwant Singh Chaufal shows the Court disciplining its own power.
The rest of the answers
The first answer is free. The rest come with the KSLU B.A. LL.B. Semester 6 solved papers.
You have read the question paper and its first answer in full. Buy the solved papers once and you can read every answer of every solved paper in this semester.
Solved papers: ₹499 Already bought it? Sign in
The question paper itself stays free, and so does the syllabus.
What should we fix or add?
Found an error in this volume? Report it and we will check it against the paper.