Indian Polity • JudiciaryHard

Examine the scope of Judicial Review and the doctrine of 'Procedure Established by Law' versus 'Due Process of Law' in the Indian judicial system. Which landmark interpretation governs how the Supreme Court and High Courts (including Kerala High Court) evaluate legislative enactments affecting personal liberty?

A. Indian judiciary applies 'Procedure Established by Law' under Article 21, but through judicial interpretation post-Maneka Gandhi case, it incorporates substantive due process standards akin to fairness and non-arbitrariness.✓ Correct Answer

B. Indian courts strictly apply American 'Due Process of Law' without any constitutional textual reference to procedure established by law.

C. High Courts have no authority to review legislative enactments for procedural propriety, which is solely vested in international tribunals.

D. Judicial review in India is confined strictly to financial bills and taxation statutes passed by state legislatures.

💡 Solution & Explanation

The Indian judiciary historically adhered strictly to the literal text of 'Procedure Established by Law' under Article 21, but transformed its scope through the landmark Maneka Gandhi case of 1978. The Supreme Court ruled that any legislative procedure affecting personal liberty must be just, fair, and reasonable, effectively importing the American doctrine of substantive due process. This expanded judicial review to protect fundamental rights aggressively.

🚩 Report a problem

Practice more Indian Polity Judiciary questions →

More Indian Polity Judiciary questions