Criminal contempt? Not now, My Lords – Published in Frontline

The Supreme Court has found lawyer Prashant Bhushan guilty of criminal contempt of court for two tweets. It has recorded that “the tweet has the effect of destabilising the very foundation of this important pillar of the Indian democracy”, it “tends to shake the public confidence in the institution of judiciary” and undermines the dignity and […]

Ayodhya — History will be the judge – Published in The Indian Express

In 1994, the Supreme Court of India said that, “within a short time, the entire structure was demolished and razed to the ground. Indeed, it was an act of ‘national shame’. What was demolished was not merely an ancient structure; but the faith of the minorities in the sense of justice and fair play of […]

Delhi Riots: Could Courts Have Handled the Crisis Differently? – Published in The Quint

When we look back at the Northeast Delhi riots of 24-26 February, one question that will continue to be asked is – could the judiciary have intervened? As things stand today, Muslim victims are finding it difficult even to get FIRs registered, or to avail the compensation that is due to them. Victims are being […]

Retirement of Tainted Judge a Reminder of How the Executive Failed the Judiciary – Published in The Wire

The process required for the initiation of impeachment proceedings against Justice S.N. Shukla stood complete in January, 2018. Yet, the Central government failed to act. In the higher judicial system, very rarely has an occasion come when two Chief Justices of India have had to remind the prime minister of something. Alas, two consecutive CJIs […]

Equity and NPR Data – Published in Frontline

From the time of Independence until 2019, India’s citizenship law was region- and religion-neutral. The Constituent Assembly debated issues relating to citizenship before giving final shape to the provisions in the Constitution, which came into force in 1950. Later, the Citizenship Act 1955 (Act of 1955) was enacted and also amended several times, incorporating additional […]

Cases of Multiple FIRs–Goswami Facts Needs A Re-Look In Future It Is Hate Crime, A Social Disorder! – Published in LiveLaw

The Arnab Goswami case in the Supreme Court resulted in quashing various similar FIRs which had been registered in different parts of the country relating to his TV programme broadcasted on 21.04.2020, viewed nationwide. Allegations in FIRs were communal in nature, instigating Hindus against Muslims and Christian . Very often, multiple FIRs are challenged in courts. On […]

Justice Gogoi in Rajya Sabha: Beware, ‘Anti-nationals’? – Published in NewsClick

At the very outset, I feel compelled to state that I am a first-generation advocate, practising with little support from the ‘system’. I cannot boast of the kind of resources that give the legal profession its reputation of being an elite pursuit. We legal practitioners understand that the system reserves many of its ‘favours’ for […]

Why India is not capable of carrying out NPR – Published in Mumbai Mirror

The Centre introduced the National Register of Citizens (NRC) by placing Section 14A in the existing Citizenship Act of 1955, through an amendment in 2003. This added provision gives discretion to the government to either go ahead with the exercise of NRC or not. It is not an obligatory exercise. To give effect to this […]

Why Unsigned Addenda to Ayodhya Verdict Must Go – Published in

One notable and never-seen-before feature of the recent verdict of the Supreme Court in the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmbhoomi dispute is the separate and anonymous “addenda” affixed to the unanimous ruling of the five-judge bench. Running into 116 pages, this addenda marks a completely new beginning; that of a judge making his opinion public through a […]

Ayodhya Judgement, Far From Right – Published in India Tomorrow

In 1857, the US Supreme Court decided in Dred Scott v. Sandford, that the Constitution of the United States was not meant to include American citizenship for black people, and therefore the rights and privileges it confers upon American citizens could not apply to them. It was wrong proposition but binding on the US citizens […]