Ahmedabad, Feb 27: The role of judiciary had become more `demanding and effective' in the recent years because of changes in the moral values and approaches of the functionaries at the helm of affairs of legislature and executive of the state, Chief Justice of Supreme Court A S Anand said today.

Delivering the late Justice S D Shah memorial lecture here, Justice Anand said during the early years, the three limbs of the state mostly functioned within their permissible limits and only marginal trespasses by legislature or executive into the forbidden fields were noticed and duly corrected by the judiciary. The task performed by the judiciary during that period was thus not very heavy.

He observed subsequent changes in the moral values and approaches of the functionaries, at the helm of affairs in their respective fields, gave rise to many orders made by the executive resulting in illegal detentions and violation of the right to life and liberty guaranteed to the citizens by theConstitution under article 21.

Under these circumstances, the role of judiciary, particularly that of high courts and Supreme Court has become crucial, he added. Justice Anand said the expanded concept of locus standi in connection with public interest litigation, by judicial interpretation from time to time, had expanded the jurisdictional limits of the courts exercising judicial review. This expanded role had been given the title of `judicial activism' by those who are critical of this expanded role of the judiciary.

The main thrust of the criticism is that judiciary by its directives to the administration is usurping functions of the legislatures and of the executive and is running the country. He said what these critics of the judiciary overlook is that it is the tardiness of legislatures and the indifference of the executive to address itself to the complaints of the violation of human rights of citizens which provides the necessity for judicial intervention.

He said in cases where the executiverefuses to carry out the legislative will or ignores or thwarts it, it is surely legitimate for courts to step in and ensure compliance with the legislative mandate.

Justice Anand said that judicial activism in India encompasses an area of legislative vacuum in the field of human rights. It reinforces the strength of democracy and reaffirms the faith of the public in the rule of law. The judiciary, however, can act only as an alarm clock but not as a time-keeper.

After giving the alarm call, it must ensure to see that the executive performs its duties in the manner envisaged by the Constitution, he added.

He said failure of judiciary to deliver justice within a time frame had brought about a sense of frustration amongst the litigants. The over-flowing dockets of the courts all over the country should not be taken as a sign of failure of the system but a sign of faith in the administration of justice by those who are involved in litigation.

He said to some extent delay in the disposal of cases is also`judge made' and was of the view that tardiness of procedural law also contributed in no small measure to cause delay in the disposal of cases.

The administration of criminal justice in our country appears to be at cross-roads.