Class 8 Civics Chapter 1 Question Answers - Social and Political Life - III

Q1: List two reasons why you believe an independent judiciary is essential to democracy.
Ans: Independent judiciary is essential to democracy because

• It allows the courts to work independently, without being under the influence of the rich and powerful people or other branches of the state like – the legislature and the executive.
• The court can play a crucial role in protecting the Fundamental Rights of the  citizens as well as enforce the rule of law.

Q2: What is the structure of the judicial system of India?
Ans: There are three different levels of courts in our country. There are several courts at the lower level while there is only one at the apex level. The courts that most people interact with are what are called subordinate or district courts. These are usually at the district or Tehsil level or in towns and they hear many kinds of cases. Each state is divided into districts that are presided over by a District Judge. Each state has a High Court which is the highest court of that state. At the top is the Supreme Court that is located in New Delhi and is presided over by the Chief Justice of India. The decisions made by the Supreme Court are binding on all other courts in India.

Q3: Differentiate between Criminal Law and Civil Law.
Ans: Criminal law and civil law are two distinct branches of legal systems that govern different types of disputes and offenses. Here's a comparison between the two:

Criminal Law

Nature of Dispute:

• Criminal law deals with offenses that are considered harmful to society as a whole.
• The state, represented by a prosecutor, brings charges against the accused.
• The primary aim is to punish the offender for violating laws and to maintain social order.

Burden of Proof:

• The burden of proof lies with the prosecution. They must prove the defendant's guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt."
• The standard of proof is high, ensuring that there is strong evidence to establish the accused's guilt.

Punishment:

• If found guilty, the offender faces penalties such as fines, imprisonment, probation, or even capital punishment (in some jurisdictions).
• The objective is to deter criminal behavior, protect society, and rehabilitate the offender.

Role of Parties:

• Parties involved are the state (prosecution) vs. the accused (defendant).
• The victim's role is often secondary; the state represents the collective interest of society.

Civil Law

Nature of Dispute:

• Civil law deals with disputes between individuals or entities over rights, obligations, contracts, property, and other private matters.
• One party, the plaintiff, files a lawsuit against another party, the defendant, seeking compensation or specific actions.

Burden of Proof:

• The burden of proof lies with the plaintiff. They must prove their case by a "preponderance of the evidence," showing that it is more likely than not that their claims are true.

Remedies:

• If the defendant is found liable, the court orders remedies such as monetary compensation (damages), injunctions, or specific performance.
• The objective is to provide the plaintiff with a remedy for their loss or harm suffered.

Role of Parties:

• Parties involved are the plaintiff vs. the defendant.
• The victim's role is central; the plaintiff seeks redress for harm or damages suffered.

In summary, criminal law focuses on offenses against society as a whole, with the state prosecuting the accused and aiming to punish and deter criminal behavior. Civil law, on the other hand, deals with disputes between individuals or entities, seeking to provide remedies and compensation to the aggrieved party. The burden of proof and the goals of the legal process differ significantly between these two branches of law.

Q4: Re-read excerpts from the judgment on the Olga Tellis vs Bombay Municipal Corporation case. Now write in your own words what the judges meant when they said that the Right to Livelihood was part of the Right to Life.
Ans: In Olga Tellis vs. Bombay Municipal Corporation case, the judges said that the Right to Livelihood was part of the Right to Life. They stated that life does not merely imply an animal existence; it cannot be lived without a means of living, that is, “the means of livelihood”. The judges conferred that eviction from a pavement or slum is deprivation of means of livelihood for the poor who cannot afford to live anywhere else. They take up small jobs in surrounding areas and to lose their pavement or slum would lead to loss of a job resulting in loss of a means of livelihood. Consequently, leading to “deprivation of life”. This is how the judges connected Right to Livelihood to the Right to Life.

Q5: Write a brief note on the independence of the judiciary.
Ans: One aspect of this independence is the ‘separation of powers’. This means here is that other branches of government – the legislature and the executive – cannot interfere in the work of the judiciary. The courts are not under the government and do not act on their behalf. All judges in the High Court as well as the Supreme Court are appointed with very little interference from these other branches of government. Once appointed to this office, it is also very difficult to remove a judge.

Q6: What is the Role of the Judiciary?
Ans: Broadly speaking, the work that the judiciary does can be divided into the following:

• Dispute Resolution: The judicial system provides a mechanism for resolving disputes between citizens, between citizens and the government, between two state governments and between the centre and state governments.
• Judicial Review: As the final interpreter of the Constitution, the judiciary also has the power to strike down particular laws passed by the Parliament if it believes that these are a violation of the basic structure of the Constitution. This is called judicial review.
• Upholding the Law and Enforcing Fundamental Rights: Every citizen of India can approach the Supreme Court or the High Court if they believe that their Fundamental Rights have been violated.

Q7: Re-read the list of Fundamental Rights provided in Chapter 1. How do you think the Right to Constitutional Remedies connects to the idea of judicial review?
Ans: The Right to Constitutional Remedies connects to the idea of judicial review in its capacity of protecting the rights of an individual against the working of the State legislature or executive. The Right to Constitutional Remedies allows citizens to move the court if they think that any of their Fundamental Rights are being violated by the State administration. Judicial review implies invalidation of legislative or executive action if it is seen to violate Fundamental Rights. Hence, the Right to Constitutional Remedies and judicial review are inter-connected because the latter is practiced when a Fundamental Right is violated by the State. In this case, a higher court can repeal the judgments of a lower court based on its own investigation.