Some thoughts on the Naz decision, here. In many ways, the shameful decision is a consequence of what has been unfolding in India for a few years now, where there an emphasis only on outcomes. The line between the legal process and the political process has been jettisoned and core judicial values like independence, rationality, and finality have been betrayed in the past three decades through forms of adjudication whose culprits are judges, lawyers, and litigants alike. The upshot of this has been that the Supreme Court no longer believes it needs to attend to matters like precedent, the textual content of legal materials, doctrinal coherence, and so forth. The running joke is that there is not one Supreme Court of India but many – the verdict you get will turn on which courtroom your matter gets listed in.
The Court’s Decline
Further reading
Summary: In Murti Devi & Anr. v Balkar Singh, the Jammu & Kashmir High Court denied maintenance to a woman in a live-in relationship after considering her male-partner’s conviction for...
Summary: This article analyses a recent High Court order quashing a rape complaint and imposing punitive directions against the complainant. It examines how the Court departs from settled limits on...
Summary: In this article, the author critically examines the recent advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on state obligations concerning climate change, unpacking its doctrinal...
This blog examines whether ‘Shri Mata Vaishno Devi Institute of Medical Excellence’ qualifies as a minority institution under Article 30 in light of the Supreme Court’s AMU judgment. Applying the...
Summary: The persistent intrusion of work into personal time not only erodes an individual’s temporal boundaries, but also puts to test the inadequacies of the existing labour safeguards...
Summary: This article examines the discriminatory framework of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961 which grants maternity leave to adoptive mothers only when the adopted child is below three months of...