This has got to be one of the most interesting back-and-forth during a Supreme Court argument. Gone are the days of judges passively listening to senior advocates drone on and on. This bench, at least, seems to be in a combative mood.
A Lakhman Rekha for The Judiciary
Further reading
Blurb: The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita’s Section 104 revives the constitutional infirmities of the repealed Section 303 IPC, despite its ostensible reformist intent. By maintaining mandatory sentencing...
Blurb: This blog discusses the inadequacy of the current refugee law framework in addressing the pressing issue of climate refugees. It subsequently discusses the imminent need to develop regional...
Blurb: This blog discusses the inadequacy of the current refugee law framework in addressing the pressing issue of climate refugees. It subsequently discusses the imminent need to develop regional...
Blurb: The Essential Religious Practices (ERP) Test is scheduled to be reviewed by the Supreme Court of India. This piece highlights the inadequacies of the ERP Doctrine, and argues for a change...
Blurb: The article advocates extending euthanasia to non-terminally ill patients, emphasizing autonomy and dignity under Article 21. Critiquing current laws, it highlights ethical dilemmas and...
In this piece, the author revisits the legacy of Bhulabhai Desai and his masterful defense at the Indian National Army Trials of 1945, exploring how Bhulabhai’s arguments not only reframed the INA’s...
It is very sad to see that such ludicrous arguments are advanced by the Senior Advocates in the Supreme Court. Article 142 of the Constitution of India provides enormous powers to the Supreme Court to take up such steps as are necessary to meet the ends of justice. Those who always talk about Lakshman Rekha are timid and Luddites. If the Supreme Court had failed to evolve certain novel methods like the PILs to address the problems of the general public, the society would have, by now, been festering with stinking rots. Lakshman Rekha is meant for those who indulge into wrongdoings and they are not supposed to cross it. But take an example: Traffic lights should not be violated is a general rule, however, if a dacoit is escaping after looting somebody, then in that case whether the policemen should wait for the traffic light to turn green or simply jump the red light and catch him? Policeman should be awarded for apprehending the culprit or be punished for violating the signal? Obviously, any right thinking would support the cause espoused by the policeman instead of delving deep into technicalties.
Parmanand Pandey, Advocate