NCERT CLASS 8 CIVICS CHAPTER 5 JUDICIARY

 NCERT CLASS 8 CIVICS CHAPTER 5 JUDICIARY

1. Why do you think an independent judiciary is necessary to carry out the important function of upholding the law and enforcing fundamental rights?
2. How does the Right to Constitutional Remedies connect to the idea of judicial review?
3. Fill in each tier with the judgments given by the various courts in the Sudha Goel case.
4. Tick the true sentences and correct the false ones based on the Sudha Goel case.
5. Why is the introduction of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the 1980s a significant step in ensuring access to justice for all?
6. In your own words, what did the judges mean when they said that the Right to Livelihood was part of the Right to Life, based on the Olga Tellis vs Bombay Municipal Corporation case?
7. Write a story around the theme, "Justice delayed is justice denied".

Answer:

1. An independent judiciary is necessary to carry out the important function of upholding the law and enforcing fundamental rights because it ensures that the judiciary is free from interference or influence from other branches of the government or powerful individuals or groups. This independence allows the judiciary to make impartial and fair judgments based on the law and the Constitution, without any fear or favor.
2. The Right to Constitutional Remedies connects to the idea of judicial review because it provides citizens with the power to approach the courts if they feel that their fundamental rights have been violated. Judicial review is the power of the courts to review the constitutionality of laws and executive actions, and the Right to Constitutional Remedies allows citizens to challenge such laws and actions if they believe that they are unconstitutional or violate their fundamental rights.
3. Supreme Court - upheld the decision of the High Court; High Court - convicted the accused of culpable homicide not amounting to murder and sentenced them to imprisonment; Lower Court - acquitted the accused of all charges.
4. (a) True; (b) False; (c) False (the decision of the Supreme Court is final and binding).
5. The introduction of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) in the 1980s is a significant step in ensuring access to justice for all because it allows individuals or groups to file lawsuits on behalf of those who are unable to approach the courts themselves, particularly marginalized and disadvantaged groups. PILs have been used to challenge unconstitutional laws, executive actions, and violations of fundamental rights, and have helped to bring about social and legal change.

6.                  6. In the Olga Tellis vs Bombay Municipal Corporation case, the judges stated that the Right to Livelihood was a part of the Right to Life. This means that the Constitution of India recognizes that every person has a fundamental right to earn a livelihood and provide for themselves and their families. The right to life includes the right to livelihood, and denying a person the opportunity to earn a living is a violation of their fundamental rights. The judges recognized that homelessness and poverty are a serious threat to a person's right to life, and that the state has an obligation to ensure that every citizen has access to basic necessities and the means to earn a living.

 

2.     7.     Radha had been fighting for justice for the past ten years. Her husband had been killed in a hit and run accident, and the driver had fled the scene. The police had promised her that they would find the culprit and bring him to justice, but as the years went by, Radha lost hope. She watched as the case was transferred from one court to another, and each time, a new judge would take over the case and ask for more evidence.

                Radha was determined not to give up, even though it seemed that justice would never be served. She went from lawyer to lawyer, hoping that someone would take up her case and fight for her rights. But each time, she was turned away. No one wanted to take on a case that had been delayed for so long.

          Finally, after ten long years, Radha's case was heard by a new judge. The evidence was presented once again, and this time, the judge took note of the fact that justice had been delayed for far too long. The driver was finally brought to court, and he confessed to the crime.

          Radha felt a sense of relief wash over her as the judge pronounced the verdict. Justice had been served, but it had come at a great cost. Radha had lost ten years of her life fighting for what should have been a simple case. She realized that justice delayed is truly justice denied, and that the legal system needs to be more efficient in delivering justice to those who have been wronged