Question Description
The judiciary is considered as the guardian and protector of Indian Constitution and supervises the implementation of fundamental rights and duties in the country. In the case of L. Chandra Kumar V. Union of India it has been held that the power of judicial review is a part of basic structure of the Indian Constitution.The emergence of judicial review gave birth to a new movement which is called Judicial Activism. Judicial Activism refers to a philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy to guide their decisions. The Constitution of India divides the powers of government into three branches i.e. legislature, executive and judiciary and has defined their roles clearly.Legislature and executive are responsible for making the law of the land and judiciary is responsible for interpreting these laws and also has the power to review the law i.e. whether it is made in consonance with the basic principles of constitution or not. So, it is when the judiciary steps into the shoes of the executive and legislature and embarks on the work of lawmaking rather than interpreting laws, it is deemed to be judicial activism.Q. Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the argument made by the author?a)Judicial activism is a great step to curb injustice.b)Judicial activism can be used for negative influence as well. .c)Judicial activism is exercised by the judiciary if the executive or legislative branches of the government do not consonant with the Constitution.d)Judicial activism is a great concept that ensures nobody can take control of the country and the democracy functions well.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2025 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about The judiciary is considered as the guardian and protector of Indian Constitution and supervises the implementation of fundamental rights and duties in the country. In the case of L. Chandra Kumar V. Union of India it has been held that the power of judicial review is a part of basic structure of the Indian Constitution.The emergence of judicial review gave birth to a new movement which is called Judicial Activism. Judicial Activism refers to a philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy to guide their decisions. The Constitution of India divides the powers of government into three branches i.e. legislature, executive and judiciary and has defined their roles clearly.Legislature and executive are responsible for making the law of the land and judiciary is responsible for interpreting these laws and also has the power to review the law i.e. whether it is made in consonance with the basic principles of constitution or not. So, it is when the judiciary steps into the shoes of the executive and legislature and embarks on the work of lawmaking rather than interpreting laws, it is deemed to be judicial activism.Q. Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the argument made by the author?a)Judicial activism is a great step to curb injustice.b)Judicial activism can be used for negative influence as well. .c)Judicial activism is exercised by the judiciary if the executive or legislative branches of the government do not consonant with the Constitution.d)Judicial activism is a great concept that ensures nobody can take control of the country and the democracy functions well.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for The judiciary is considered as the guardian and protector of Indian Constitution and supervises the implementation of fundamental rights and duties in the country. In the case of L. Chandra Kumar V. Union of India it has been held that the power of judicial review is a part of basic structure of the Indian Constitution.The emergence of judicial review gave birth to a new movement which is called Judicial Activism. Judicial Activism refers to a philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy to guide their decisions. The Constitution of India divides the powers of government into three branches i.e. legislature, executive and judiciary and has defined their roles clearly.Legislature and executive are responsible for making the law of the land and judiciary is responsible for interpreting these laws and also has the power to review the law i.e. whether it is made in consonance with the basic principles of constitution or not. So, it is when the judiciary steps into the shoes of the executive and legislature and embarks on the work of lawmaking rather than interpreting laws, it is deemed to be judicial activism.Q. Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the argument made by the author?a)Judicial activism is a great step to curb injustice.b)Judicial activism can be used for negative influence as well. .c)Judicial activism is exercised by the judiciary if the executive or legislative branches of the government do not consonant with the Constitution.d)Judicial activism is a great concept that ensures nobody can take control of the country and the democracy functions well.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for The judiciary is considered as the guardian and protector of Indian Constitution and supervises the implementation of fundamental rights and duties in the country. In the case of L. Chandra Kumar V. Union of India it has been held that the power of judicial review is a part of basic structure of the Indian Constitution.The emergence of judicial review gave birth to a new movement which is called Judicial Activism. Judicial Activism refers to a philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy to guide their decisions. The Constitution of India divides the powers of government into three branches i.e. legislature, executive and judiciary and has defined their roles clearly.Legislature and executive are responsible for making the law of the land and judiciary is responsible for interpreting these laws and also has the power to review the law i.e. whether it is made in consonance with the basic principles of constitution or not. So, it is when the judiciary steps into the shoes of the executive and legislature and embarks on the work of lawmaking rather than interpreting laws, it is deemed to be judicial activism.Q. Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the argument made by the author?a)Judicial activism is a great step to curb injustice.b)Judicial activism can be used for negative influence as well. .c)Judicial activism is exercised by the judiciary if the executive or legislative branches of the government do not consonant with the Constitution.d)Judicial activism is a great concept that ensures nobody can take control of the country and the democracy functions well.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of The judiciary is considered as the guardian and protector of Indian Constitution and supervises the implementation of fundamental rights and duties in the country. In the case of L. Chandra Kumar V. Union of India it has been held that the power of judicial review is a part of basic structure of the Indian Constitution.The emergence of judicial review gave birth to a new movement which is called Judicial Activism. Judicial Activism refers to a philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy to guide their decisions. The Constitution of India divides the powers of government into three branches i.e. legislature, executive and judiciary and has defined their roles clearly.Legislature and executive are responsible for making the law of the land and judiciary is responsible for interpreting these laws and also has the power to review the law i.e. whether it is made in consonance with the basic principles of constitution or not. So, it is when the judiciary steps into the shoes of the executive and legislature and embarks on the work of lawmaking rather than interpreting laws, it is deemed to be judicial activism.Q. Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the argument made by the author?a)Judicial activism is a great step to curb injustice.b)Judicial activism can be used for negative influence as well. .c)Judicial activism is exercised by the judiciary if the executive or legislative branches of the government do not consonant with the Constitution.d)Judicial activism is a great concept that ensures nobody can take control of the country and the democracy functions well.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of The judiciary is considered as the guardian and protector of Indian Constitution and supervises the implementation of fundamental rights and duties in the country. In the case of L. Chandra Kumar V. Union of India it has been held that the power of judicial review is a part of basic structure of the Indian Constitution.The emergence of judicial review gave birth to a new movement which is called Judicial Activism. Judicial Activism refers to a philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy to guide their decisions. The Constitution of India divides the powers of government into three branches i.e. legislature, executive and judiciary and has defined their roles clearly.Legislature and executive are responsible for making the law of the land and judiciary is responsible for interpreting these laws and also has the power to review the law i.e. whether it is made in consonance with the basic principles of constitution or not. So, it is when the judiciary steps into the shoes of the executive and legislature and embarks on the work of lawmaking rather than interpreting laws, it is deemed to be judicial activism.Q. Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the argument made by the author?a)Judicial activism is a great step to curb injustice.b)Judicial activism can be used for negative influence as well. .c)Judicial activism is exercised by the judiciary if the executive or legislative branches of the government do not consonant with the Constitution.d)Judicial activism is a great concept that ensures nobody can take control of the country and the democracy functions well.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for The judiciary is considered as the guardian and protector of Indian Constitution and supervises the implementation of fundamental rights and duties in the country. In the case of L. Chandra Kumar V. Union of India it has been held that the power of judicial review is a part of basic structure of the Indian Constitution.The emergence of judicial review gave birth to a new movement which is called Judicial Activism. Judicial Activism refers to a philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy to guide their decisions. The Constitution of India divides the powers of government into three branches i.e. legislature, executive and judiciary and has defined their roles clearly.Legislature and executive are responsible for making the law of the land and judiciary is responsible for interpreting these laws and also has the power to review the law i.e. whether it is made in consonance with the basic principles of constitution or not. So, it is when the judiciary steps into the shoes of the executive and legislature and embarks on the work of lawmaking rather than interpreting laws, it is deemed to be judicial activism.Q. Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the argument made by the author?a)Judicial activism is a great step to curb injustice.b)Judicial activism can be used for negative influence as well. .c)Judicial activism is exercised by the judiciary if the executive or legislative branches of the government do not consonant with the Constitution.d)Judicial activism is a great concept that ensures nobody can take control of the country and the democracy functions well.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of The judiciary is considered as the guardian and protector of Indian Constitution and supervises the implementation of fundamental rights and duties in the country. In the case of L. Chandra Kumar V. Union of India it has been held that the power of judicial review is a part of basic structure of the Indian Constitution.The emergence of judicial review gave birth to a new movement which is called Judicial Activism. Judicial Activism refers to a philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy to guide their decisions. The Constitution of India divides the powers of government into three branches i.e. legislature, executive and judiciary and has defined their roles clearly.Legislature and executive are responsible for making the law of the land and judiciary is responsible for interpreting these laws and also has the power to review the law i.e. whether it is made in consonance with the basic principles of constitution or not. So, it is when the judiciary steps into the shoes of the executive and legislature and embarks on the work of lawmaking rather than interpreting laws, it is deemed to be judicial activism.Q. Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the argument made by the author?a)Judicial activism is a great step to curb injustice.b)Judicial activism can be used for negative influence as well. .c)Judicial activism is exercised by the judiciary if the executive or legislative branches of the government do not consonant with the Constitution.d)Judicial activism is a great concept that ensures nobody can take control of the country and the democracy functions well.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice The judiciary is considered as the guardian and protector of Indian Constitution and supervises the implementation of fundamental rights and duties in the country. In the case of L. Chandra Kumar V. Union of India it has been held that the power of judicial review is a part of basic structure of the Indian Constitution.The emergence of judicial review gave birth to a new movement which is called Judicial Activism. Judicial Activism refers to a philosophy of judicial decision-making whereby judges allow their personal views about public policy to guide their decisions. The Constitution of India divides the powers of government into three branches i.e. legislature, executive and judiciary and has defined their roles clearly.Legislature and executive are responsible for making the law of the land and judiciary is responsible for interpreting these laws and also has the power to review the law i.e. whether it is made in consonance with the basic principles of constitution or not. So, it is when the judiciary steps into the shoes of the executive and legislature and embarks on the work of lawmaking rather than interpreting laws, it is deemed to be judicial activism.Q. Which one of the following, if true, most weakens the argument made by the author?a)Judicial activism is a great step to curb injustice.b)Judicial activism can be used for negative influence as well. .c)Judicial activism is exercised by the judiciary if the executive or legislative branches of the government do not consonant with the Constitution.d)Judicial activism is a great concept that ensures nobody can take control of the country and the democracy functions well.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.