Supreme Court

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 becomes right when it yields concrete results in women’s favour.

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.

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

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.