Judicial Activism Must Not Become ‘Judicial Terrorism’: CJI Gavai; Justice Sikri Explains Line Between Activism, Overreach

Chief Justice of India Bhushan Gavai

Highlighting the judiciary’s role as a corrective force, the Chief Justice of India BR Gavai said that though judicial activism is bound to stay, it should not be permitted to be converted to judicial adventurism and judicial terrorism.

CJI Gavai was speaking at an event organised by the Nagpur District Court Bar Association where he stressed that all 3 wings of democracy must follow their boundaries.

Former SC judge Justice AK Sikri, in an exclusive conversation with iTV Network, talked in detail about the difference between judicial activism and judicial overreach.

He said: ‘When the CJI says judicial activism is here to stay, it means activism that strengthens the rule of law and bridges the gap between law and society.’

Justice Sikri talked about the dual role of judiciary, one is to protect the Constitution and the rule of law, and other to bridge the gap between law and society.

Justice Sikri said that the separation of powers among the legislature, executive, and judiciary—stating that while lawmaking is the domain of the legislature, the judiciary’s primary responsibility is to interpret the law and uphold fundamental rights.

He pointed to examples such as upholding the rights of women, transgender persons, and the disabled as instances of necessary and meaningful judicial activism.