ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846

Articles by Alok Prasanna KumarSubscribe to Alok Prasanna Kumar

Pendency during the Pandemic

Twelve months after measures to fight COVID-19 forced courts in India to suspend in-person hearings and move online, the Supreme Court finds itself facing increased pendency and demands to restart in-person hearings. Apart from the increased backlog, the Court also finds itself with fewer judges and no immediate nominations in the pipeline to fill the gaps. The incoming Chief Justice of India will therefore have to address a range of issues that fundamentally affect the Court’s basic functioning.

Two Papers on Judicial Bias in India

Two papers studying bias in judicial decision-making in India using large data sets have come to very different conclusions. One examines bail decisions and finds that childhood exposure to communal riots seems to influence whether a judge is likely to grant bail. The other examines convictions and finds no trace of similar bias on grounds of religion or gender. Both papers shed light, in different ways, on the working of India’s legal system and are not necessarily contradictory.

 

An Act of Judicial Disingenuity

The Supreme Court’s intervention (Rakesh Vaishnav v Union of India 2021) in the ongoing protests and debate over the three controversial “farm laws”1 has been met with a storm of criticism (Hegde 2021; Yamunan 2021).

Cow Slaughter Laws as State-sanctioned Violence

The Karnataka Prevention of Slaughter and Preservation of Cattle Bill, 2020 is the most recent attempt of the Bharatiya Janata Party in the state to make for harsh cow slaughter laws, which have been used in the past to disproportionately target Dalits and Muslims across the country. The bill is poorly drafted and offends notions of rule of law and procedural justice, raising questions on whether it is even intended to be applied as a law or is just a tool of state-sanctioned violence.

 

Appointment of Judges to the Higher Judiciary during the Pandemic—II

The impact of the appointment process for high court and Supreme Court judges following the recommendations of the collegium is examined. The functioning of the collegium itself was not significantly affected by the pandemic. However, how many of its recommendations have been implemented by the union government, and how quickly, point to the need for the judiciary and the government to work together to ensure optimal judicial functioning.

 

Appointment of Judges to the Higher Judiciary during the Pandemic – I

As with most other activities, the COVID-19 pandemic has had a severe impact on the functioning of courts, revealed through the steep drop in the number of cases disposed of during the pandemic. However, there has not been much comment on the functioning of the collegium, which, theoretically, should not be compromised in these circumstances. The performance of the Supreme Court collegium during the pandemic is examined in this column by comparing it with available data for past years.

Clarifying the Rights of Daughters as Coparceners

By clearing the confusion over the interpretation of the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005, the Supreme Court in Vineeta Sharma v Rakesh Sharma (2020) has secured for Hindu women the right to be coparceners in joint family property with retrospective effect from 1956. The three-judge bench has restored the progressive intent to the 2005 amendment, but has based it on a conservative interpretation that reinforces the basic concepts of the Hindu joint family and coparcenary ownership of property.

Domicile Reservations in National Law Universities

National law universities set up by state governments have remained “islands” for too long–elitist and distanced from the local communities in which they were located. Domicile reservations, favouring students who are from the state where such universities have been set up are one way of rectifying this trend. The elite resistance to this move has no basis in constitutional principles and reflects an unfounded fear of the “local.”

Lawless Lawmaking in a COVID-19 World

India’s management of the COVID-19 global pandemic has been marked by excessive centralisation, lawless lawmaking and non-consultative decision-making processes at the union government level. This has created an atmosphere of confusion in the management of the disease, leading to India becoming one of the global hotspots and cases fast spiralling out of the control of local authorities.

A Regressive World View on Scheduled Tribe Reservations

The Supreme Court’s setting aside of the Andhra Pradesh government’s preference scheme for Scheduled Tribes in schools in Scheduled Areas shows up a world view which believes that Adivasis need to be pushed into the “mainstream” and compelled to abandon their “backward” culture. However, this goes against the constitutional vision, as made clear in the Andhra Pradesh High Court’s majority judgment in the same case, which articulates a more nuanced and sensitive position on the rights of India’s Adivasis.

Mapping the Appointments and Tenures of Supreme Court Judges

The debate about the tenure of judges of the Supreme Court of India is fixated somewhat unnecessarily on the retirement age than the actual time spent in the Court. Examining the length of the tenure gives some hints as to the unwritten criteria of appointment and may potentially offer a deeper understanding of the systemic problems faced by the courts.

Pages

Back to Top