Report No. 95
4. Do you feel that the Supreme Court is acting as a third chamber?
The judiciary appears to have been divided into two classes: the activists who believe that if the legislative text is too bold to be self acting the Judges must make the provisions viable by evolution of supplementary principles even if it may appear to possess the flavour of law making [Rajendra Prasad v. State of U.P., AIR 1979 SC 916 (924)]. The other school of strict constitutionalists does not countenance reading into a statute conditions which are not to be found therein by process of construction, [Gurbaksh Singh Sibba v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 565].
The latter school abhors the theory of judicial legislation even though on facts of a particular case the court is satisfied that the existing law requires: an urgent reappraisal. [Techno Impex v. Gebr. Van Weelde, (1981) 2 WLR 821 (842)]. Some legal writers feel that the court speculates and pontificates about society and economics mostly from non-evidence, without staff investigation, opinions of experts on law enforcements, industry and in general without the tools necessary for legislative work.