CBSE Class 8 Civics NCERT Solutions: Chapter 5 - Judiciary

The judiciary plays a vital role in any democracy by upholding the law and ensuring that citizens' Fundamental Rights are protected. These rights are guaranteed by the Constitution, and it is the judiciary's responsibility to safeguard them against any infringement, whether by individuals, groups, or the government itself.

An independent judiciary is absolutely essential for carrying out this function effectively. Independence means that the judiciary can operate without being influenced or pressured by other branches of government, such as the executive (government) or the legislature (Parliament/State Assemblies). If the judiciary were not independent, judges might be afraid to make decisions that go against the wishes of those in power. This could lead to unfair judgments, a weakening of the rule of law, and the erosion of citizens' fundamental rights, which would undermine the very principles of democracy.

The Fundamental Rights listed in Chapter 1 are:

1. Right to equality.
2. Right to Freedom.
3. Right to freedom of religion.
4. Right against exploitation.
5. Cultural and Educational Rights.
6. Right to Constitutional Remedies.

The Right to Constitutional Remedies is a cornerstone of our justice system. It empowers every citizen to approach a court of law if they believe that any of their Fundamental Rights have been violated by the state or any other authority. This right essentially gives teeth to all other Fundamental Rights.

This right is directly connected to the concept of judicial review. Judicial review is the power of the judiciary to examine the laws passed by the Parliament or State Legislatures, as well as the actions of the executive. If the judiciary finds that a particular law or action violates the Constitution, especially its basic structure or any Fundamental Right, it has the power to strike down that law or nullify that action. Therefore, the Right to Constitutional Remedies provides the mechanism through which citizens can bring potential violations to the court's attention, enabling the judiciary to exercise its power of judicial review and uphold the Constitution.

The Sudha Goel case involved a tragic incident where Sudha Goel was murdered by her husband, Laxman Kumar, and his two brothers, Ballabhdas and Shashi Kumar. The case illustrates the functioning of the Indian judicial system through its different tiers.

Here's how the judgments would typically flow through the court system:

• Lower Court (Sessions Court): In the initial trial, the Lower Court heard the evidence presented by the prosecution and the defense. The court found Laxman Kumar, Ballabhdas, and Shashi Kumar guilty of murder and sentenced them to life imprisonment.
• High Court: The convicted individuals appealed against the Lower Court's decision in the High Court. The High Court reviewed the case, examined the evidence and arguments again. In this specific case, the High Court upheld the conviction of Laxman Kumar but acquitted his brothers, Ballabhdas and Shashi Kumar, finding insufficient evidence against them.
• Supreme Court: The state, dissatisfied with the High Court's acquittal of the brothers, appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court reviewed the case once more. It agreed with the High Court's decision regarding Laxman Kumar but also found sufficient evidence to convict Ballabhdas and Shashi Kumar. Consequently, the Supreme Court overturned the High Court's acquittal and sentenced all three accused (Laxman Kumar, Ballabhdas, and Shashi Kumar) to life imprisonment.

This progression shows how a case can be heard at different levels, with higher courts having the power to review and alter the decisions of lower courts.