Published Paper Details:

The role of the Indian judiciary in enforcing human rights has been central to the development of constitutional jurisprudence in India. Since the adoption of the Constitution in 1950, the judiciary has played a crucial role in upholding the human rights of citizens through the interpretation of constitutional provisions, particularly Part III on Fundamental Rights. This paper explores the ways in which the judiciary has safeguarded human rights, focusing on constitutional safeguards, judicial interpretation, and the mechanisms for accountability in India's complex legal landscape. The judiciary has interpreted the Constitution expansively, ensuring that human rights protections extend beyond mere statutory provisions to include social, economic, and cultural rights, often derived from the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs) and international law. In its role as the final interpreter of the Constitution, the judiciary has consistently interpreted human rights provisions to cover a wide range of rights, including the right to life (Article 21), freedom of speech (Article 19), and equality before the law (Article 14). Landmark judgments such as Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978), Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973), and Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) have expanded the scope of constitutional rights, thereby strengthening India's human rights framework. The judiciary's mechanisms for ensuring accountability are also critical, including the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) process, which has allowed marginalized groups to approach courts for enforcement of their rights. However, challenges persist in ensuring full protection, especially in a context of political, economic, and social complexities. This paper critically examines these issues, offering insights into how the judiciary contributes to a vibrant democracy, guarantees justice, and ensures accountability in the protection of human rights.