It is beyond contest that the leadership, the troops on ground, policy-makers, police and everyone else joined together to create this tragedy of errors and they were guilty of criminal negligence leading to loss of precious lives of trained soldiers. Worst part is that CRPF in particular and policy makers and others responsible for controlling the situation refuse to learn from past mistakes and such tragic loss of life keeps recurring with alarming regularity.
If there is a bona fide conspiracy against the Indian State, there are enough laws in the statute book to look into them. A mature, liberal democracy cannot fight its own citizens. The Law Commission in its August 2018 report pointed out that “while it is essential to protect national integrity, it should not be misused as a tool to curb free speech. Dissent and criticism are essential ingredients of a robust public debate on policy issues as part of a vibrant democracy”.
Publicity is a chronic addiction whose cure is yet to be found and that is why the issue raised by the Super Chief merits this Law-merick by Gook.
A two-judge bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices A K Sikri and Abdul Nazeer has issued slew of directions on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by noted RTI activists Anjali Bhardwaj, Commodore Lokesh Batra (Retd.) and Amrita Johri seeking filling up of the vacancies at Central Information Commission and State Information Commissions and also the direction to adhere to the transparent process in the selection process of the Information Commissioners.
This Lawmerick appreciates the skills of bureaucrats in churning out reports, which weigh a lot, but often say nothing.
Supreme Court Collegium comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI), Justices A K Sikri and Justice S A Bobde in a meeting of the Collegium held on February 12, 2019, took certain decisions for the appointment of judges in the five High Courts- Allahabad High Court, Kerala High Court, Calcutta High Court, Madhya Pradesh High Court and Orissa High Court. The Collegium agreed to relax the income criterion to a reasonable extent in cases where such recommendees belong to categories of SC/ST/OBC or represent Government in their capacity as Standing /Panel Counsel before the Courts.
two-judge bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justices A K Sikri and Abdul Nazeer has issued slew of directions in a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by noted RTI activists Anjali Bhardwaj, Commodore Lokesh Batra (Retd.) and Amrita Johri seeking filling up of the vacancies at Central Information Commission and State Information Commissions and also the direction to adhere to the transparent process in the selection process of the Information Commissioners.
The two court masters who have been dismissed had the protection of Article 311. The question that arises is, why was there no inquiry conducted and no charges framed against them before their services were terminated. Dismissal dispensing with inquiry itself is a serious matter, not only because it affects the rights of person concerned, but also because it deprives the general public of the right to know what was the misconduct committed by the public servant.
The Bench emphasised that the issue was about a good judicial officer who seeks to join service again. Justice Sikri, in the first of its kind order, the bench passed an order requesting the High Court to hold a full court enquiry and come back within a week, with a decision on her reinstatement with seniority. They pointed out that video conferencing facilities were available in the High Court and there should be no logistical problem in taking a decision as soon as possible. If indeed the High Court agrees to reinstate her with seniority but without back wages, it will indeed set a precedent for women in the judiciary and ensure a working environment free form discrimination.
February 15,2019
August 13,2018
June 11,2018
June 15,2018
June 11,2018
June 11,2018
August 30,2018
August 29,2018
April 19,2018
April 19,2018
The Leaflet Special Issue is a one-stop destination to get a wide-angle, rigorous perspective on raging debates of the day. Centred around one theme and investigating it from every possible direction, the Special Issue will focus on comprehensive, in-depth and wide-spectrum analysis of the biggest sociolegal and constitutional battles that are central to our understanding of the rule of law, justice as well as human and civil rights. A platform to both look back and look ahead, to tease out the nuances lost in chasing breaking news and views, our emphasis will be to foreground issues that are often neglected by mainstream media.
By alerting the nation that ‘democracy was in danger’, the quartet of judges has upheld constitutional values at a time when the rule of law faces unprecedented attack.
June 11,2018
June 11,2018
June 11,2018
June 11,2018
The significance of the judgment lies not just in its protection of the right to privacy but in its insistence that no government, majoritarian or otherwise can violate the rule of law. Life is not a gift of the state but is a natural right, because it is.
May 28,2018
May 28,2018
May 28,2018
May 28,2018
The historical import of such moments is not complete without a reflection of cases past and especially when ‘ghosts’ of certain cases need to be exorcised to enable a vocabulary of non-discrimination and equality in our daily lives inside and outside of the courtroom.
May 28,2018
May 28,2018
May 28,2018
May 28,2018
The silhouette of the Red Fort, the warmth of the winter sun softly glowing from across the Humanyun’s tomb, the rare visits of the peacocks in Lodhi gardens, the sprawling, beautiful chaos of the Jama Masjid, the deserted Adham Khan’s tomb, and many more such sites are governed by Acts aimed at conserving and protecting these heritage monuments.
