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
Summary: The approach to ‘transformative constitutionalism’ in Bandhua Mukti Morcha vs Union stands in stark contrast to the rationale preferred in Balram Singh. The central issue concerns both...
Summary: The piece analyses the scope of Section 175(4) of the BNSS. The provision requires a Magistrate, before directing an investigation against a public servant, to seek a report from a superior...
The article focuses on how the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirty-first Amendment) Bill, 2026, alters the foundational logic of delimitation itself. In particular, it highlights two underexplored...
The article focuses on how the Constitution (One Hundred and Thirty-first Amendment) Bill, 2026, alters the foundational logic of delimitation itself. In particular, it highlights two underexplored...
Blurb: 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...
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...
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