Judicial Review in India

Judicial review is the power of the judiciary to declare laws passed by the legislature as unconstitutional.

The case of Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973) established the doctrine of judicial review in India.

The basic structure doctrine is the principle that the fundamental principles and features of the Constitution cannot be amended.

Article 32 of the Indian Constitution empowers the Supreme Court to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights.

Article 226 of the Indian Constitution empowers the High Courts to issue writs for the enforcement of fundamental rights.

A law can be challenged in a judicial review on the grounds of violation of fundamental rights, violation of the basic structure of the Constitution, or unreasonableness.

The remedies available to the court in a judicial review include declaring the law unconstitutional, issuing a writ of mandamus, and issuing a writ of prohibition.

Judicial review is significant in a democracy because it protects the fundamental rights of citizens, ensures that the government acts within the limits of the Constitution, and promotes the rule of law.

Legislative judicial review is not a type of judicial review.

Violation of international law is not a ground for judicial review in India.

Awarding compensation is not a remedy available to the court in a judicial review in India.

Marbury v. Madison is not a significant case related to judicial review in India.

Power to amend the Constitution is not a power of the Supreme Court of India in relation to judicial review.

Doctrine of stare decisis is not a limitation on the power of judicial review in India.