the tools and techniques of judicial creativity and precedent

Umar Sharif Budha Ghar Pe Hai Full Download.

Uttarakhand Jan Morcha”, AIR 1999 SUPREME COURT 2193, the Supreme Court has imposed restriction on Judicial creativity saying that, no doubt, role of the judiciary has been expanded to newer dimensions in recent past, but that is no justification for using judicial power for imposing such unbearable burden on the State which in turn would be compelled to extract money out of common man’s coffers to meet such massive financial burden. Judicial creativity may be safely permissible, where citizens are suffering due to lethargy of legislative inaction. According to Holme the judiciary can make law only ‘interstitially’ by filling up the gaps within the law. On the contrary other judges and jurists are of the opinion that judges do and must legislates. It has always been a burning question as to whether the judicial creativity is permissible or inevitable and if so, up to what extend? Judicial Creativity and its Permissible Limits Coke, Hale and Blackstone have believed that judges play no role in law making. THE TECHNIQUES OF JUDICIAL CREATIVITY Introduction Positive outcome of the judicial creativity is to innovation of hidden Constitutional rights for protection of citizens from State actions.

Precedent is evidence, the best possible evidence, of rules of law. On judicial creativity, judicial decisions were considered a major source of law.7 It. JUDICIAL ACTIVISM AND JUDICIAL CREATIVITY OF THE SUPREME COURT IN CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPRETATION INTRODUCTION In.

The tools and techniques of judicial creativity and precedent