Other Judgments (except Lily Thomas) delivered by him or as part of the Bench are:
This defends the right of the bar dancers to pursue their profession.
On why juvenile age cannot be reduced.
Constitution Bench dismisses plea for introducing reservation in
super-speciality. It says in Paragraph 19 that the very concept of reservation
2:1 judgment against NEET, in which Justice Kabir was in the majority, has invited a huge controversy. It appears that the judgment was leaked, before it was delivered, with a contributor to the Bar and Bench predicting the ratio of the judgment a few hours before its delivery. Also, the dissenting Judge has apparently recorded his displeasure that time was insufficient to facilitate proper discussion among the Judges. All these have led to the demand that the Court should review this judgment, and if it fails, the Government should restore NEET. Today’s Hindu carries an edit, as well as an article on the issue on the oped page.
Lily Thomas v. UOI (Justice Kabir was not part of the Bench which delivered it)
This article in Indian Express compares Lily Thomas with the CB judgment in K.Prabhakaran while Rajeev Dhavan compares Lily Thomas with Saka Venkata Rao, delivered in 1953. Justice Katju’s critique of Lily Thomas can be found here.