Q. Judicial Process as an instrument of Social Ordering.
“ Judicial Process” means any judicial proceeding in connection with the dispensation of justice by any court of competent jurisdiction and “ Social Ordering” means activating the instrument of Judicial Process in setting right the wrong done or eliminating injustice from the society. But here we are mainly concerned with role of the constitutional courts evolving new juristic principles during the course of judicial process for upholding social order keeping in view the need of fast changing society. Therefore, it would be appropriate to examine as to whether Judicial Process , is an instrument of social ordering?
...view middle of the document...
Union of India", AIR 1993 SUPREME COURT 477, the Apex Court has innovated concept of 'creamy layer test' for securing benefit of social justice to the backward class, needy people, and excluded persons belonging to 'creamy layer .'
Bigamy is a social evil which often creates social disorder. The Apex Court has tightened the noose over those avoiding punishment by taking plea of conversion to Islam. In "Lily Thomas v. Union of India", AIR 2000 S C 1650, it was held by the Apex Court that the second marriage of a Hindu husband after conversion to Islam without having his first marriage dissolved under law, would be invalid, the second marriage would be void in terms of the provisions of Section 494, IPC and the apostate-husband would be guilty of the offence punishable under Section 494, IPC. This verdict of the Apex Court would certainly be helpful in eliminating social evil of bigamy.
In "Paniben v. State of Gujarat", AIR 1992 S C 1817, the Apex Court held that it would be a travesty of justice if sympathy is shown when cruel act like bride burning is committed. Undue sympathy would be harmful to the cause of justice. The Apex Court directed that in such cases heavy punishment should be warded.
Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India", AIR 1984 S C 802, is a good example of social ordering by way of judicial process. The Apex Court has tried to eliminate socio-economic evil of bonded labour, including child labour and issued certain guide lines to be followed, so that recurring of such incidents be eliminated.
Caste system and Judicial Process
In "Lata Singh v. State of U. P.", AIR 2006 SC 2522, the Apex Court has given protection to the major boy and girl who have solemnized inter-caste or inter-religious marriage.
In "M.C. Mehta v. State of T.N.", AIR 1997 S C 699, the Supreme Court has issued direction the State Governments to ensure fulfillment of legislative intention behind the Child Labour (Prohibition and Regulation) Act (61 of 1986). Tackling the seriousness of this socio-economic problem the Supreme Court has directed the Offending employer to pay compensation, a sum of Rs. 20,000/ for every child employed.
In Gaurav Jain v. U.O.I. AIR 1997 SC 3021, the Apex court issued directions for rescue and rehabilitation of child prostitutes and children of the prostitutes.
Dowry death is perhaps one of the worst social disorders prevailing in the society, which demands heavy hand of Judicial Process to root-out this social evil. In "Raja Lal Singh v. State of Jharkhand", the Supreme Court has laid down that there is a clear nexus between the death of Gayatri and the dowry related harassment inflicted on her, therefore, even if Gayatri committed suicide, S. 304-B of the I. P. C. can still be attracted.
Equality: Man and Woman
In AIR India v. Nargesh Meerza, AIR 1981 SC 1829, the Apex Court declared that – “the...