1. The US Supreme Court’s latest opinion in the case of McDonald v. Chicago (available here) maps the trajectory of substantive due process doctrine, while holding that the second amendment right to bear arms for self defense applies against the states.
2. I had discussed in this op-ed piece in the Hindu some time ago how the Selvi and R Gandhi cases were Indian substantive due process cases.
This article examines India's Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023, focusing on the adequacy of its consent-based framework as the primary mechanism for privacy protection. It discusses...
This article examines the Supreme Court’s 2025 judgment on the Aravalli Hills and Ranges, focusing on the Court’s effort to resolve the long-standing definitional ambiguity surrounding the ecosystem...
The article is divided into two parts. Part-I seeks to establish that ASHA workers fulfil conditions to be recognised as workman under the IRC. Part-II aims to show how the feminisation aspect...
The article is divided into two parts. Part-I seeks to establish that ASHA workers fulfil conditions to be recognised as workman under the IRC. Part-II aims to show how the feminisation aspect...
Summary: The article analyses the case of Hari Devageeth v Union of India. It highlights the conflict faced by the court between two constitutional rights: a transgender man’s right to bodily...
Introduction The fifth panel highlighted the multi-faceted dimensions of behavioural accountability within the Indian Judicial system. Moving beyond the constitutional frameworks, the panelists...
how can it be said that r gandhi used substantive due process?
due process in terms of A. 14 always existed in the sense of reasonable classificantion, object of the Act or discrimination
but saying that due process of r gandhi is like due process of selvi is fallcious because r gandhi uses a. 14 and not A. 21 while selvi uses A. 21.