Score:
4.5/10
Analyze what earned this score 🔥
Topper’s Copy
GS2
Indian Polity
10 marks
The increasing use of suo motu cognisance by the Supreme Court has strengthened judicial responsiveness to issues of public importance. However, frequent interventions may raise concerns regarding judicial overreach and institutional neglect of lower courts. Critically examine.
Student’s Answer
Evaluation by SuperKalam
Demand of the Question
- How suo motu cognizance strengthens judicial responsiveness
- Concerns about judicial overreach from frequent interventions
- Impact on institutional neglect of lower courts
- Critical evaluation balancing both perspectives
What you wrote:
suo motu cognizance allows the supreme court to take up cases on its own motion, acting as a vital tool for judicial responsiveness when fundamental rights are breached or governance deficit occurs.
suo motu cognizance allows the supreme court to take up cases on its own motion, acting as a vital tool for judicial responsiveness when fundamental rights are breached or governance deficit occurs.
Suggestions to improve:
- Could enhance with constitutional context (e.g., Article 32 empowering Supreme Court as protector of fundamental rights, making suo motu a natural extension of this constitutional duty).
What you wrote:
# Strengthening Judicial responsiveness
→ Protection of Rights: The SC acts as a saviour of civil liberties during crisis. For example Supervising COVID-19 relief, migrant welfare and environmental degradation).
→ Voice to the Voiceless: It bypasses procedural hurdles, allowing the court to address grave injustices reported in media or letters, serving marginalized groups who cannot access litigation.
→ Accountability: It forces the executive to act swiftly on burning public issues, bridging the gap between legislative intent and administrative inaction.
# Strengthening Judicial responsiveness
→ Protection of Rights: The SC acts as a saviour of civil liberties during crisis. For example Supervising COVID-19 relief, migrant welfare and environmental degradation).
→ Voice to the Voiceless: It bypasses procedural hurdles, allowing the court to address grave injustices reported in media or letters, serving marginalized groups who cannot access litigation.
→ Accountability: It forces the executive to act swiftly on burning public issues, bridging the gap between legislative intent and administrative inaction.
Suggestions to improve:
- Could elaborate on landmark suo motu cases (e.g., Vishaka case (1997) establishing workplace sexual harassment guidelines when legislature failed to act)
- Can include specific examples of media-triggered interventions (e.g., Supreme Court's suo motu cognizance of Delhi pollution based on newspaper reports leading to comprehensive air quality measures)
What you wrote:
Concerns: Overreach and institutional Neglect.
→ Judicial Overreach :- Frequent intervention risk breaching the separation of power (Art 50). When the judiciary dictates policy or administrative execution, it enters the domain of legislature and executive.
→ Neglect of Lower Courts: By directly intervening in local or state level issues, the SC by-passes the high court and subordinate judiciary. This dilutes the established judicial hierarchy and undermines the institutional capacity of lower courts.
→ Lack of Adversarial Rigor: Suo Motu cases often lack well defined petitioners and structured evidence, which can lead to sweeping, unexecutable guidelines.
→ Judicial Pendency: Diverting limited judicial time to suo motu matters worsens the existing backlog of standard appeals.
Concerns: Overreach and institutional Neglect.
→ Judicial Overreach :- Frequent intervention risk breaching the separation of power (Art 50). When the judiciary dictates policy or administrative execution, it enters the domain of legislature and executive.
→ Neglect of Lower Courts: By directly intervening in local or state level issues, the SC by-passes the high court and subordinate judiciary. This dilutes the established judicial hierarchy and undermines the institutional capacity of lower courts.
→ Lack of Adversarial Rigor: Suo Motu cases often lack well defined petitioners and structured evidence, which can lead to sweeping, unexecutable guidelines.
→ Judicial Pendency: Diverting limited judicial time to suo motu matters worsens the existing backlog of standard appeals.
Suggestions to improve:
- Could discuss doctrine of judicial restraint (e.g., Lakshman Chandra case emphasizing courts should not enter policy domain unless constitutional violation occurs)
- Can elaborate on how bypassing affects High Courts' constitutional role under Articles 226-227 as constitutional courts for states
- Could mention specific instances where suo motu led to policy confusion (e.g., conflicting guidelines on COVID-19 management affecting state implementation)
What you wrote:
While Suo motu power is an indispensable shield for public good, it must be exercised with judicial restraint. The Supreme Court should formulate objective guidelines for its invocation, ensuring it remains an exceptional remedy rather than a routine intervention, thereby preserving institutional balance.
While Suo motu power is an indispensable shield for public good, it must be exercised with judicial restraint. The Supreme Court should formulate objective guidelines for its invocation, ensuring it remains an exceptional remedy rather than a routine intervention, thereby preserving institutional balance.
Suggestions to improve:
- Could strengthen with constitutional morality perspective (e.g., emphasizing that judicial activism must align with constitutional values while respecting democratic institutions' autonomy, as highlighted in recent judicial pronouncements on institutional balance).
Your answer demonstrates solid understanding of constitutional principles and judicial functioning. The structure is logical with good examples, though expanding on specific landmark cases and constitutional provisions would enhance depth and analytical rigor significantly.
Demand of the Question
- How suo motu cognizance strengthens judicial responsiveness
- Concerns about judicial overreach from frequent interventions
- Impact on institutional neglect of lower courts
- Critical evaluation balancing both perspectives
What you wrote:
suo motu cognizance allows the supreme court to take up cases on its own motion, acting as a vital tool for judicial responsiveness when fundamental rights are breached or governance deficit occurs.
suo motu cognizance allows the supreme court to take up cases on its own motion, acting as a vital tool for judicial responsiveness when fundamental rights are breached or governance deficit occurs.
Suggestions to improve:
- Could enhance with constitutional context (e.g., Article 32 empowering Supreme Court as protector of fundamental rights, making suo motu a natural extension of this constitutional duty).
More Challenges
View All- View Challenge
GS2
Indian Polity
11 Jul, 2026
“Judicial independence cannot become a shield against judicial accountability.” Examine this statement in light of the constitutional process for removing judges and the accountability concerns raised by a judge resigning during pending removal proceedings.
- View Challenge
GS2
International Relations
Yesterday
"Critical minerals have emerged as the new strategic resources of the 21st century." Discuss their significance for India's economic and strategic security. Examine how international partnerships can strengthen India's critical mineral ecosystem.
- View Challenge
GS3
Economy
9 Jul, 2026
"The success of ethanol blending depends as much on fuel quality and vehicle compatibility as on blending targets." Examine this statement in the context of India's transition towards E20 fuel.
SuperKalam is your personal mentor for UPSC preparation, guiding you at every step of the exam journey.
Download the App
STUDY RESOURCES
CONTACT US
ⓒ Snapstack Technologies Private Limited