NCERT Solutions for Class 8 Civics Chapter 5 - Judiciary

Q1: You read that one of the main functions of the judiciary is 'upholding the law and Enforcing Fundamental Rights'. Why do you think an independent judiciary is necessary to carry out this important function?

Ans: The independence of the judiciary allows the courts to play a central role in ‘upholding the law and Enforcing Fundamental Rights’ as it ensures that there is no misuse of power by the legislature and the executive.

Anyone can approach the courts if they believe that their rights have been violated and Politicians or other socially powerful people cannot use their power to change any judgment.

Q2: 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 allows an Indian citizen to move the court if he feels that any of his or her Fundamental Rights has been violated by the State.

As the final interpreter of the Constitution, the judiciary has the power to review or even strike down any particular law passed by the Parliament if it believes that this law violates the basic structure of the constitution, which is called judicial review. 

In this way we find that the Right to Constitutional Remedies given in the Fundamental Rights is directly connected and supported by the idea of judicial review.

Q3: In the Following illustration, fill in each tier with the judgments given by the various courts in the Sudha Goel case. Check your responses with others in class.

Ans: Lower Court (Trial Court): Laxman, his mother Shakuntala and his brother-in-law Subhash Chandra were sentenced to death.
High Court: Laxman, Shakuntala and Subhash Chandra were acquitted.
Supreme Court: Laxman, Shakuntala were given life imprisonment while Subhash Chandra was acquitted for lack of sufficient evidence.

Q4: Keeping the Sudha Goel case in mind, tick the sentences that are true and correct the ones that are false.

(a) The accused took the case to the High Court because they were unhappy with the decision of the Trial Court.
(b) They went to the High Court after the supreme Court had given its decision.
(c) If they do not like the Supreme Court verdict, the accused can go back again to the Trial Court.

Ans: (a) True
(b) False. They went to the High Court after the Trial Court had given its decision.
(c) False. If they do not like the Supreme Court verdict, the accused cannot go back again to the Trial Court because the Supreme Court is the highest court in the judiciary pyramid.

Q5: Why do you think the introduction of Public interest Litigation (PIL) in the 1980s is a significant step in ensuring access to justice for all?

Ans: The Supreme Court in the early 1980s devised a mechanism of Public Interest Litigation or PIL to increase access to justice. It allowed any individual or organisation to file a PIL in the High Court or the Supreme Court on behalf of those whose rights were violated.

The legal process was greatly simplified, and even a letter or telegram addressed to the Supreme Court, or the High Court could be treated as a PIL. In the early years, PIL was used to secure justice on a large number of issues, such as rescuing bonded labourers from inhuman work conditions; one such example is securing the release of prisoners in Bihar who had been kept in jail even after their punishment term was complete.
Thus, the introduction of Public Interest Litigation is a significant step in ensuring access to justice for all.

Q6: 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 the Olga Tellis vs Bombay Municipal Corporation case, the judges stated that the Right to Livelihood was part of the Right to Life. They stated that life does not merely mean an animal’s existence; it cannot be lived without a means of livelihood. In the above-mentioned case, people were poor and lived in slums; they had small jobs and no other place to live. 

ewweeFor them, eviction from their slum means deprivation of their livelihood, which consequently means deprivation of life. This is how judges connected the right to life to the basic requirements of any livelihood, i.e. Food, Clothes and shelter.

Q7. Write a story around the theme, ‘Justice delayed is justice denied’.
Ans: Mr. Shankar was a government employee. After retirement, he came back to his forefather’s house. He requested the tenant to vacate the house. But the tenant did not vacate the house. Tenant challenged that if Mr. Shankar wanted to have his house vacated, he should move to court for justice. He was compelled to live in a rented house.
The owner lodged litigation against the tenant. After fighting the case for five years, the owner won the case. The decision was made in his favour by the trial court. But the tenant appealed against the lower court decision and date after date lingers on the decision and it took another ten years for justice. Mr. Shankar felt the justice unjustified as it was abnormally delayed.

Q8. Make sentences with each of the glossary words given?

Ans: 

• Acquit: After a trial of 10 years in the Supreme Court, Mohan was acquitted of the charge of murdering his friend.
• To Appeal: I shall appeal in the higher court against the judgment of the lower court which is against me and from which I am not satisfied
• Compensation: 5 lakh was paid to Ruchi as compensation for her husband’s accidental death.
• Eviction: Eviction proceedings are pending in the court of the Rent Commissioner.
• Violation: Violation of the untouchability act is punishable under the Constitution.

Q9. The following is a poster made by the Right to Food campaign.

• Read this poster and list the duties of the government to uphold the Right to Food.
• How does the phrase “Hungry stomachs, overflowing godowns! We will not accept it!!” used in the poster relate to the photo essay on the Right to Food

Ans: 

Duties of the Government

• That all persons get food;
• That no one goes to sleep hungry;
• That persons who are most vulnerable to hunger like the elderly, the disabled, widows, etc. get special attention;
• That there is no death because of malnutrition or hunger.

“Hungry stomachs, overflowing godowns! We will not accept it !!” do relate to the photo essay on the Right to Food on page 61 of the Textbook. We can see that due to drought in Rajasthan and Orissa, millions faced an acute shortage of food. Meanwhile, the government godowns were full of grain.
In such a situation, an organization called the People’s Union of Civil Liberties filed a PIL in the Supreme Court. It stated that the Fundamental Right to Life guaranteed in Article 21 of the Constitution includes the Right to food. The state’s excuse that they did not have adequate funds was shown to be wrong because the godowns were overflowing with grains.
The Supreme Court directed the government to provide food at cheaper prices through the government ration shops and to provide mid-day meals to children.