Former Delhi Excise Chief, Dr. Anup Kumar Srivastava received a reprieve from the Supreme Court, recently. “There is no material evidence on record in order to bring home the charge of conspiracy against the Respondent. There is no direct or circumstantial evidence to prove that the Respondent has demanded any illegal gratification and has accepted […]Read more "The Question of Six Zeroes in Call No. 51"
My Lord, Should Section 2(1)(d) of The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 that defines ‘child’ to mean any person below the age of 18 years, engulf and embrace, in its connotative expanse, the ‘mental age’ of a person or the age determined by the prevalent science pertaining to psychiatry so that a […]Read more "The Nature of Judicial Power: The Theory of Creative Interpretation"
“The jurisprudential basis for the ‘rule of widest construction’ is the hallowed belief that a Constitution is drafted with an eye on future providing a continuing framework for exercise of governmental power. Therefore, it must be elastic enough to meet new social, political and historical realities often unimagined by the framers of the Constitution. Chief […]Read more "The Doctrine of Widest Construction"
‘Scandalisation of Court’ is not ‘precisely explained’ in Supreme Court cases [See, In Re: Hon’ble Shri Justice C.S. Karnan, Suo-Motu Contempt Petition (Civil) No. 1 of 2017]. It is a species of contempt and may take several forms. A common form is the vilification of the Judge [See, Shri Baradakanta Mishra v. The Registrar of […]Read more "Scandalisation of Court"
The New York Times on April 30, 1976 came out with an editorial, ‘‘If India ever finds its way back to the freedom and democracy that were proud hallmarks of its first eighteen years as an independent nation, someone will surely erect a monument to Justice H.R. Khanna of the Supreme Court.” The Time Magazine, […]Read more "Supreme Court Judges on Indian Magazine Covers"
The crucial question ‘can citizens claim an absolute right over their body parts and refuse to give digital samples of their fingerprints and iris for Aadhar enrollment?’ will only be answered when the Unicorn Constitution Bench decides the Aadhar-Privacy issue. The Aadhar-PAN Judgment, Binoy Viswam v. Union of India [Writ Petition (Civil) 247 of 2017], […]Read more "Substantive Due Process"
Vakasha Sachdev (@VakashaS) recently commented on ‘Live Tweeting Court Proceedings’: “A stream of live tweets, posted over the course of six days, recently went viral in the Indian Twitterverse. Surprisingly, these tweets had nothing to do with Shah Rukh Khan or Baahubali or the IPL or some ridiculous reality TV star or farragoes or any of […]Read more "The Live Tweets Ailment"