Question

How can judicial interpretation of the Constitution contribute to social transformation?

• A. By restricting rights to literal constitutional meaning.
• B. By preserving the intentions of original constitutional makers.
• C. By expanding fundamental concepts like 'Right to Life' to encompass quality dimensions.
• D. By maintaining strict separation between constitutional articles.

Hint:

Think of how courts widened Article 21.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is C

Step 1: Understanding the Question:
The question asks how the way courts read the Constitution can help change society.
A good answer must show courts making the Constitution work for new social needs.

Step 2: Key Idea:
Courts in India have given wider meanings to rights. For example, the Right to Life in Article 21 has been read to include a life of dignity, livelihood, clean environment and health.
This widening of meaning is how judicial interpretation helps social change.

Step 3: Check Option 1:
Restricting rights to their literal meaning would narrow rights. A narrow reading keeps things as they are and does not push society to change.
This option is wrong.

Step 4: Check Option 2:
Preserving the original intention of the makers looks backward. It keeps the old understanding and blocks fresh readings that a changing society needs.
This option is wrong.

Step 5: Check Option 3:
Expanding basic ideas like the Right to Life so that they cover quality of life is exactly what courts have done. It brings new groups and new needs under constitutional protection.
This option is correct.

Step 6: Check Option 4:
Keeping the articles strictly separate stops courts from reading rights together. In practice courts have joined rights such as life and liberty to give wider protection. So strict separation does not help change.
This option is wrong.

Final Answer:
Option 3 shows how courts widen rights and so help social transformation.
\[ \boxed{\text{Option 3}} \]