Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
Five years' experience is a must to be able to practice as an advocate in the Supreme Coun of India. This rule was prescribed by the____
Options
Bar Council of India
Supreme Court of India
High Court of Delhi
Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India
Solution
Bar Council of India
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
Direction: The passage given below is followed by a set of question. Choose the most appropriate answer to each question.
It is very difficult to trace the origin of judicial activism in India. Since the judiciary has come to be recognized as an independent and separate organ of the Government under the Constitution of India, it would be prudent to scan the period subsequent to 1950 for tracing the origin. However, there are a few instances even prior to that period, where certain selected judges of High Courts established under the Indian High Courts Act, 1861 exhibited certain flashes of judicial activism. Way back in 1893, Justice Mahmood of the Allahabad High Court delivered a dissenting judgment that sowed the seed for judicial activism in India. In that case which dealt with an under trial who could not afford to engage a lawyer, Justice Mahmood held that the pre-condition of the case being heard would be fulfilled only when somebody speaks.
At the outset, it has to be stated that there is no precise definition of judicial activism accepted by one and all. However, there is a widely accepted notion that it is related to problems and processes of political development of a country. In other words, judicial activism deals with the political role played by the judiciary, like the other two branches of the State, the legislature and the executive. An eminent Indian jurist defines judicial activism in the following words: Judicial Activism is that way of exercising judicial power which seeks fundamental recodification of power relations among the dominant institutions of State, manned by members of the ruling classes.
The same authority goes on to add that judicial activism is the use of judicial power to articulate and enforce counter-ideologies which when effective initiates significant re-codifications of power relations within the institutions of governance. An analysis of the above attempt by Upendra Baxi to define judicial activism shows that activism of the judiciary pertains to the political role played by it, like the other two political branches. The justification for judicial activism comes from the near collapse of responsible government and the pressures on the judiciary to step in aid which forced the judiciary to respond and to make political or policy-making judgments.
Judicial Activism and judicial restraint are the terms used to describe the assertiveness of judicial power. The user of these terms presumes to locate the relative assertiveness of particular courts or individual judges between two theoretical extremes. The extreme model of judicial activism is of a court so intrusive and ubiquitous that it virtually dominates the institutions of government. The Encyclopedia of the American Constitution states that the uses of judicial restraint are not entirely uniform. Often the terms are employed non-committally i.e., merely as descriptive short hand to identify some court or judges as more activist or more restrained than others. In this sense, the usage is neither commendatory nor condemnatory.
These expressions viz., judicial activism and judicial restraint are used from the angle of the personal or professional view of the right role of the Court. Accordingly, the courts may be condemned or commended for straying from or for conforming to that right role. In the U.S.A., in more than two centuries of judicial review, superintended by more than one hundred justices who have served on the Supreme Court and who have interpreted a constitution highly ambiguous, in much of its text, consistency has not been institutional but personal. Individual judges have maintained strongly diverse notions of the proper or right judicial role.
Which of the following is the criticism of judicial activism in the passage?
Mark the best option:
Which judge tried Mahatma Gandhi’s assassination case?
Examine the Statement and Conclusions given below and choose a suitable answer from the options given:
Statements:
1. Justice delayed is justice denied. Justice hurried is justice buried.
2. More than 3 crore cases are pending in the Indian Courts.
Conclusions:
1. People are not getting justice in India.
2. Disposal of cases by ‘Fast track courts’ results in injustice.
3. Cases must be disposed of within a reasonable time.
Legal Principle: In the law of evidence, a person missing for long and not heard of, for over seven years is presumed to have died.
Facts: A, B, and C are children of F and M. At the age of 20, A went out in search of a job and was not contacting the family. All attempts to trace A by the family failed. Eight years after the death of the parents, B and C entered into a partition and took an equal share in the property of F and M. One year after this, A returned home with his wife and two children and claimed his share in the property.
Whether A’s claim is legally sustainable?
To which one of the following funds are salary and allowances of the Judges of High Court of a State charged?
Mark the best option:
A major failure of the judicial system in the country has been its ineffectiveness in ensuring speedy disposal of cases under trial. This is out of line of which among the following articles of Constitution of India which provides a right to speedy justice?
Allahabad High Court has held that the ________ of deceased Government employees are eligible for appointment on compassionate ground.
Which of the following court/tribunal ordered a levy of an environment compensatory charge on commercial vehicles not bound for the capital yet passing through Delhi?
In 2017, the Supreme Court held that right to privacy is protected under Article 21 of the Constitution of India in the context of ______________.
Regarding foreign law firms, the Supreme Court held
- That foreign law firms can set up offices in India.
- Foreign lawyers can practice in India.
- Foreign lawyers can visit India for a temporary period on a fly in and fly out basis.
- Foreign lawyers can give advice to their clients on Indian laws.
