In a virtual echo of former Chief Justice J S Verma’s observations on the limits of judicial power, the bench said: “They (the courts) must remember that judicial activism is not an unguided missile — failure to bear this in mind would lead to chaos...With a view to see that judicial activism does not become judicial adventurism, the courts must act with caution and proper restraint.”

To ensure that the sanctity and credibility of the judicial process were preserved, the apex court said: “Public adulation must not sway the judges and personal aggrandizement must be eschewed. “ It underlined, “With a view to see that judicial activism does not become judicial adventurism, the courts must act with caution and proper restraint.”

“The moral of this story,” the judges said, “is that if the judiciary does not exercise restraint and over-stretches its limits there is bound to be a reaction from politicians and others. The politicians will then step in and curtail the powers or even the independence of the judiciary...Therefore it should confine itself to its proper sphere, realizing that in a democracy, many matters and controversies are best resolved in non-judicial setting.”

Is the Delhi High Court listening?

The courts have “apparently, if not clearly, strayed into the executive domain or in matters of policy,” said the apex court as it cited the following orders of the Delhi High Court:

• Legality of constructions in Delhi

• Identifying buildings to be demolished

• Age and other criterion for nursery admissions

... contd.