ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846

Supreme CourtSubscribe to Supreme Court

The Singur Movement

​ Land Dispossession and Everyday Politics in Rural Eastern India by Kenneth Bo Nielsen, London and New York: Anthem Press, 2018; pp 221, £70, hardcover.

India’s First Per Curiam

A per curiam opinion seeks to project the court as a resolute bloc in unanimous verdicts by concealing the identity of the author(s). However, arbitrarily employing anonymity, without due regard to legal tradition and reason, adversely impacts accountability and transparency in the judiciary. As such, it is important to evaluate the Supreme Court of India’s choice of anonymity in the momentous Ayodhya decision.

Women’s Right to Property Ownership

Women’s right to property ownership becomes right when it yields concrete results in women’s favour.

Clarifying the Rights of Daughters as Coparceners

By clearing the confusion over the interpretation of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, the Supreme Court in Vineeta Sharma v Rakesh Sharma (2020) has secured for Hindu women the right to be coparceners in joint family property with retrospective effect from 1956. The three-judge bench has restored the progressive intent to the 2005 amendment, but has based it on a conservative interpretation that reinforces the basic concepts of the Hindu joint family and coparcenary ownership of property.

Understanding Citizenship and Refugees’ Status in India

The recent Rohingya crisis in South Asia raised questions regarding the refugee policies of the Indian state, which seem to take a very diplomatic position on the refugee problem. This article seeks to argue that India’s kindness for some refugee communities and ignorant behaviour for Muslim refugees has raised a doubt on its way of refugee dealings, and has posed question on the very secular face of the Indian state. How the Supreme Court as well as the Indian government has viewed and handled the refugee problem has been discussed in detail in this article.

Human Sacrifice, Sentencing and the Death Penalty

In the judicial discourse on the relationship between human sacrifice and punishment in criminal law, there are glaring errors. Looking closely at the Supreme Court’s judgment in Ishwari Lal Yadav v State of Chhattisgarh , the deviation from the principle of individualised sentencing and the consequences of ignoring evidence on the complex anthropological and psychological dimensions of human sacrifice are reflected upon.

Supreme Court Judgment on Reservations

The implementation of reservations is constitutionally mandated and cannot be left to the state’s discretion.

Probing into the Freedoms of Queer Liberation in India

Reception of the reading down by the Supreme Court of Section 377 should be more circumspect, since there is much in the decision that offers reasons for concern. Rather than making a rupture with the contemporary majoritarian political climate, the decision is, in fact, a continuation of a longer nationalist project aimed at consolidating the ideal citizen subject of the Indian nation state.

Recusal Refusals

Judges recuse themselves from benches to retain people’s trust in the judiciary. Lately, there have been controversial recusals: in one case by a few Supreme Court judges, and in another where a recusal was refused. The Chief Justice of India too had refused to recuse himself in a third case. Through an examination of various tests of determining bias and examples of other countries, a critical examination of the propriety of these refusals to recuse has been made.

Delhi’s Pollution Crisis Is a Product of State Apathy and Ignorant Policy

The government is either unwilling or incapable of implementing effective policies to tackle the current pollution crisis.

How Can the Judiciary’s Ability to Dispense Justice Be Improved?

India has a large pendency of court cases, and this has affected the judiciary’s ability to provide justice. While the creation of an All India Judiciary Services was seen as a solution to this and other problems since its introduction in 1958, the idea has received a mixed response. A batch of orders by the Supreme Court in 2019 alters recruitment rules. The author argues that these changes will help fill vacancies without compromising on the quality of judges.

Pages

Back to Top