THE ROLE OF THE SUPREME COURT IN PROTECTING FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS IN INDIA

ABSTRACT

The Supreme Court of India as the guardian of the Constitution has played a transformative role in protecting all fundamental rights thereby strengthening democracy and the rule of law as a whole. The present article thoroughly analyses the interpretative functions of the Indian Court, its important landmark judgments and its proactive stance in cases of violation of all rights. It highlights the evolving approach of the Indian Court from all fundamental issues to all contemporary challenges through mainly theoretical and analytical research and also puts forward a possible critical assessment of the major limitations and proposals for all reforms. The Indian Court has been playing an active role in protecting rights through important principles such as basic structure and judicial review but still it faces many challenges like judicial overreach, burden of pending cases and executive-legislative tension. Decriminalizing section 377 IPC is a recent development in our society and demonstrates the commitment of Indian courts towards upholding individual liberty including recognizing privacy as a fundamental right. The following several studies shed light on the effectiveness of Indian courts, their contemporary relevance and their resilience against arbitrary actions of the state and consequently present a comprehensive blueprint to further strengthen the existing constitutional democracy in India. The article concludes by suggesting a number of reforms to strike a balance between judicial activism and institutional accountability in our country and thus ensure strong protection of fundamental rights in India in the future.

INTRODUCTION

Fundamental rights for all citizens are at the core of the Indian constitutional framework that ensures liberty, equality and justice for all. All fundamental rights are a cornerstone of India’s constitutional democracy, providing all citizens full protection against arbitrary power. Drawing inspiration from the Bill of Rights of America and other democratic Constitutions, the makers of the Indian Constitution included the Fundamental Rights in Part III of the Indian Constitution as a protection against any kind of authoritarianism.

 The Supreme Court of India, being created under Article 124 of the Indian Constitution, is the highest court of our land and the ultimate court of appeal. Since the independence of India till the indefinite future, it has been entrusted with the responsibility of protecting all our rights. The role of the Court has become even more important in recent years as the scope and efficacy of all these rights have come under threat due to various kinds of encroachments by the executive and new technological and social and economic challenges. Article 32 of the Constitution vests and creates the Supreme Court as the supreme guardian of individual freedom to enforce the Fundamental Rights. This renders the function of the Supreme Court of our nation not merely important but also dynamic in redefining the socio-legal environment of India. The significance of such a function has been emphasized through a series of landmark judgments extending the extent of fundamental rights beyond their literal confines. The aim of this present article is to present both a critical and research-based analysis of how and in what way the Supreme Court of India has discharged its duty to protect fundamental rights, drawing on examples from all the recent judgments.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This article uses a theoretical research methodology and analyses the existing jurisprudence, statutes and the works of several scholars to understand the role of the Supreme Court in protecting fundamental rights. The research for this article is primarily theoretical and thus draws on secondary sources such as constitutional provisions, jurisprudence and several scholarly articles, a variety of commentaries and several government reports. It draws on a number of authoritative judgments of the Supreme Court of India, several legal databases and several policy documents to ensure current contemporary relevance. The approach also includes a comparative analysis of important landmark judgments and recent developments based on relevant constitutional provisions and public reactions.

[A] LEGAL FRAMEWORK

• A few Constitutional Provisions: Indian fundamental rights are found in Part III of the Constitution. These are the Right to Equality comprising Articles 14-18, Right to Freedom comprising Articles 19-22, Right against Exploitation comprising Articles 23-24, Right to Religious Freedom comprising Articles 25-28, Cultural and Educational Rights comprising Articles 29-30 and Article 32 which Dr. B.R. Ambedkar called the “heart and soul” of the Constitution which provides all citizens with the exclusive right to approach the Supreme Court directly for enforcement of all their rights.

These articles empower the Supreme Court of our country as the “guardian” and “guarantor” of personal liberty due to which judicial protection becomes accessible and strong. 2

• Judicial Review: The Supreme Court has the full power to review all laws and executive actions that violate these rights thus ensuring that the Constitution remains the supreme law of the land.

[B] JUDICIAL INTERPRETATION.

• Right to Equality: The Court held that the basic structure including equality cannot be changed by Parliament in Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerala (1973). The Court legalized consensual homosexual relationships and also framed the dignity and equality of LGBTQ+ citizens in Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India (2018).
• Right to life and liberty: Article 21 of the Constitution of India has been interpreted broadly and includes the right of every person to live with dignity, the right to privacy, and the right to education and a healthy environment. In Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), the Court viewed that procedure in accordance with the law must be fair, just and reasonable. The seminal judgment of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (2017) held that privacy is a fundamental right..
• Freedom of expression: The Court has established an impenetrable balance between freedom of expression for everyone and limitations on hate speech and national security. Section 66A of IT Act was overturned in the case of Shreya Singhal v Union of India (2015) for being abstract and repressive of freedom of expression.
• Religious freedom: In the Sabarimala case, also known as Indian Young Lawyers Association vs State of Kerala (2018), the Court emphasized on equality over religious conservatism and said that women’s right to worship must be upheld.
• Environmental Rights: Article 21 was extended in a significant case named M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India, wherein the Court provided an important recognition to the right to a clean environment and ordered some policies towards pollution control and sustainable development.
• A number of Landmark Judgments: The Supreme Court of India has pronounced a number of landmark judgments which have greatly influenced the meaning of the fundamental rights of all citizens.

[C] CRITICAL ANALYSIS

The Court has drawn commendation for its judicial activism, though critics have the contention that it frequently interferes in the jurisdiction of the legislative and executive branches. ● Disadvantages and Challenges: Though the Supreme Court’s major proactive role in India has been impressive, there have been difficulties in the effective enforcement of fundamental rights.

• Judicial Encroachment: Critics argue that it sometimes goes beyond its jurisdiction and encroaches upon the legislative area like many other courts in India, due to which there is always tension between the judiciary and the legislature.
• Delayed justice: It is a way of protecting fundamental rights and at the same time it is also a problem that due to pending cases in the Supreme Court, justice is not delivered on time and hence enforcement of fundamental rights gets affected. Implementation of rights on time is still challenging, with more than 83,312 cases pending in the Supreme Court (As of July 2024).
• Social resistance: The Court’s liberal judgments mostly encountered resistance from right-wing segments of society, resulting in implementation difficulties.
• Inconsistent: Freedom of religion e.g. Hijab ban case, 2022 Inconsistent judgments on different points create uncertainty in jurisprudence.

[D] RECENT DEVELOPMENT

• Right to Privacy: The Supreme Court identified the right of privacy as a constitutional right under Article 21 in the path-breaking judgment of Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India (2017) which led to a historic milestone in the safeguarding of personal liberty.
• Same-Sex Marriage: The Supreme Court declined to legalize gay marriage in India on a legislative choice in the case Supriyo v. Union of India (2023). Due to this, the Court has maintained equality and critics argue that it missed the chance for reformative change.
• Freedom of Expression Online: The Court is still ruling on cases regarding the regulation of disinformation and hate speech online, indicating the increasing relevance of digital rights.
• Environmental Justice: The Court urged the government to take climate mitigation action in 2024 and also reasserted the ongoing role of the courts in protecting the environment.
• Ongoing Debates: The Court’s intervention in the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) cases and all ongoing debates on the rights of marginalised groups are testimony to its important role in addressing current challenges to fundamental rights.

The Court intervened in political “bulldozer justice” and prevented arbitrary state action without judicial scrutiny.

[E] SUGGESTION OR WAY FORWARD

• Strengthening judicial infrastructure: There is a need to fully upgrade the judicial infrastructure to resolve all pending cases and there is also a need to appoint more judges in India to ensure timely justice.
• Need for public awareness campaign: The judiciary, with the support of all or most of India’s civil society, should promote awareness among citizens about their fundamental rights so that they can be fully empowered to redress violations.
• Need for Legislative Support: The legislature should support the judiciary for the benefit of India by making strong laws that strengthen the protection of all the fundamental rights of the citizen and hence it can be ensured that the rights of all citizens are protected.
• Need to use technology: Complete digitisation of judicial processes and use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in some aspects can reduce the number of pending cases and see improvement in transparency.

RECENT JUDGEMENTS (2024-2025)

Recent Supreme Court interventions have protected several rights:

• Bilkis Bano case: Procedural fairness and victim rights were strengthened by quashing illegal exemption orders.
• Electoral bond scheme: The scheme was held totally unconstitutional as it violated the right to information and transparency in political funding.
• Caste-based segregation in prisons: Articles 14, 15 and 21 were strengthened to eliminate discriminatory provisions in prisons.
• Protection of minors under POCSO: High Court attempts to dilute child protection laws were completely reversed and strict enforcement was affirmed.
• Bulldozer judgment: Punitive demolitions without due process were condemned and the rule of law was strengthened.
• Manish Sisodia bail case: Right to speedy trial and personal liberty upheld.

CONCLUSION

The Supreme Court of India has always been at the forefront in protecting the fundamental rights of all citizens and has adapted its jurisprudence to meet all emerging challenges which has helped the Court in protecting all fundamental rights. It has also pushed the boundaries of civil liberty and justice through judicial innovation and activism. The Court has reaffirmed the importance of civil liberty in a democratic polity through its leadership and positive intervention in several landmark cases.

The Courts of India have been playing a vital role as a safeguard against the erosion of civil liberties by expanding the jurisprudence of all rights and protecting marginalised communities, by keeping a check on the actions of the executive in India. The role of the Supreme Court of India in protecting and promoting fundamental rights and in coping with the unique challenges presented by India’s transition to a developing country will continue to be vital to the fulfillment of constitutional ideals.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Cases References

➢ Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala, (1973) 4 SCC 225 (India).

➢ Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) AIR 597, 1978 SCR (2) 62 (India).

➢ M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, (1987) 1987 AIR 1086, 1987 SCR (1) 819 (India). 6

➢ Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, (2018) AIR 2018 SC 4321 (India).

➢ Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) AIR 2017 SC 4161 (India).

➢ Shreya Singhal v. Union of India, (2015) AIR 2015 SC 1523 (India).

➢ Indian Young Lawyers Ass’n v. State of Kerala, (2019) 11 SCC 1 (India) (Sabarimala case).

➢ Supriyo v. Union of India, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1387 (India).

➢ Bilkis Bano v. Union of India, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 264 (India).

➢ Association for Democratic Reforms v. Union of India (Electoral Bonds Case), 2024 INSC 113 (India).

➢ State of Maharashtra v. State of Gujarat (Caste-based Prison Segregation Case), 2024 SCC OnLine SC 670 (India).

➢ XYZ v. State of Madhya Pradesh (POCSO Dilution Case), 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 676 (India).

➢ Sudama v. State of Uttar Pradesh (Bulldozer Case), 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1021 (India).

➢ Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of Enforcement, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 63 (India).

Constitutional Provisions

➢ India Const. art. 14.

➢ India Const. art. 15.

➢ India Const. art. 16.

➢ India Const. art. 17.

➢ India Const. art. 18.

➢ India Const. art. 19, cl. 1(a).

➢ India Const. art. 19, cl. 1(g).

➢ India Const. art. 21.

➢ India Const. art. 22.

➢ India Const. art. 23.

➢ India Const. art. 24.

➢ India Const. art. 25.

➢ India Const. art. 26.

➢ India Const. art. 27.

➢ India Const. art. 28.

➢ India Const. art. 29.

➢ India Const. art. 30.