The media’s reportage of Nandini Sundar judgment mostly focussed on the judgment, rather than on how the petitioners fought and won the case, untrammelled by the dilatory tactics of the Chhattisgarh Government during the proceedings. In this article,
the lead petitioner, Nandini Sundar narrates her personal exposure, as a non-lawyer, to the vicissitudes of the case, and what she learnt from it. As she referred to in her Indian Express article, published a few days ago, the media’s neglect of the other petition in this case, filed by Kartam Joga,
and his own imprisonment by the State Government on charges unknown to many, is indefensible. Unfortunately, despite Joga’s legal victory in the Supreme Court, there has been no campaign to secure his release from jail. To my surprise, much of the media’s space (including this blog’s) seems to have been spent on whether the Supreme Court Bench was correct in indulging in the ideological discussion in the first 20 paragraphs of the judgment. In my article,
I try to achieve some balance, by drawing attention to the relevant paragraph of the judgment, which perhaps convinces the reader why the Bench was justified in writing those paragraphs. The outcome of the Centre’s review petition
in the case will be instructive.