New Delhi, Delhi
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant has spoken about the role of the judiciary, the supremacy of the Constitution and the importance of judicial intervention in protecting the rights of vulnerable sections of society. In an interview with DD News, the CJI said courts do not deliver judgments in favour of either the ruling side or the opposition. Their decisions are guided by the Constitution, the law and constitutional values.
CJI Surya Kant described the Constitution as the country’s greatest source of strength and emphasised the judiciary’s responsibility to protect its basic structure. His remarks come amid continuing public and political debate over the role of courts and the scope of judicial intervention in matters involving governance and public interest.
Constitution Remains the Foundation
The Chief Justice said social and political circumstances may change with time, but the basic structure of the Constitution must remain protected. He stressed that the constitutional framework should continue to be strengthened and respected.
The statement is significant because several judicial decisions often become part of wider political and public discussions. CJI Surya Kant made it clear that the judiciary does not function to support a particular political party, individual or group. Courts are expected to examine matters on the basis of constitutional principles, statutory law and established legal procedures.
What Did CJI Surya Kant Say About Judicial Activism?
Addressing the issue of judicial activism, the CJI highlighted the importance of judicial intervention in cases involving people who are socially or economically disadvantaged.
A significant section of the population may not have easy access to legal information or the resources required to approach a court. In such circumstances, judicial intervention can play an important role in ensuring that constitutional and legal rights are not left unprotected.
The Chief Justice also underlined that the impact of a court case can extend beyond the individual who approaches the judiciary. In several matters, a judgment can affect larger sections of society, including people who may not have the means or opportunity to directly present their concerns before a court.
PIL Can Help Vulnerable Sections
Public Interest Litigation, or PIL, has emerged as an important mechanism for bringing issues of wider public importance before the courts.
Through PILs, matters affecting large groups of people can be raised even when the individuals most affected may find it difficult to approach the judiciary themselves. Over the years, the mechanism has been used in cases involving public welfare, fundamental rights and the interests of disadvantaged communities.
The CJI’s remarks underline the broader constitutional purpose of such judicial mechanisms—ensuring that access to justice is not limited only to those who have the resources and ability to initiate conventional legal proceedings.
Importance of Suo Motu Action
CJI Surya Kant also highlighted the role of courts taking suo motu cognisance in appropriate circumstances. There are situations where people affected by an incident or systemic problem may be unable to approach a court directly.
In such cases, courts can, within their constitutional and legal jurisdiction, take cognisance of matters on their own. Such action can bring issues involving public rights and vulnerable groups before the judiciary.
The broader objective, according to the CJI’s remarks, is to ensure that people who are unable to appear before the court themselves do not remain completely outside the protection of law.
Judiciary’s Core Responsibility
The central message of CJI Surya Kant’s remarks is the constitutional neutrality of the judiciary. Courts, he emphasised, are not expected to choose between political sides. Their responsibility is to interpret and apply the law while safeguarding constitutional principles.
Protection of the Constitution’s basic structure, preservation of citizens’ rights and ensuring access to justice for vulnerable sections remain important aspects of this responsibility.
His comments also highlight the delicate balance expected from the judiciary: while courts must remain within their constitutional and legal limits, they also have a role in protecting rights when individuals or communities are unable to effectively seek judicial remedies themselves.
Ultimately, the judiciary’s authority rests on its commitment to the Constitution and the rule of law. CJI Surya Kant’s remarks reinforce the principle that judicial decisions are intended to serve constitutional governance and justice rather than any particular political interest.
