The primary function of Courts is to interpret and apply laws according to will of those who made them and not to transgress into domain of policy-­making. It is not for Court to pronounce policy. It cannot term a particular policy as fairer than the other. Courts must exercise restraint.

“Untouchability though intended to be abolished, has not vanished in last 70 years. We are still experimenting with ‘tryst with destiny’. The plight of untouchables is, they are still denied various civil rights; the condition is worse in the villages, remote areas where fruits of development have not percolated down. One thing is sure, we have not been able to eradicate untouchability in a real sense as envisaged.

The answer can only be found by soul searching. 

In Khadak Singh v. State of Himachal Pradesh, AIR 1963 SC 1295, this Court has observed, right to life is not merely an animal’s existence. Right to live with human dignity is included in right to life as observed in Francis Coralie Mullin v. Union Territory Delhi, Administrator, AIR 1981 SC 746; Olga Tellis v. Bombay Corporation, AIR 1986 SC 180.

There is no presumption, members of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes may misuse provisions of law and it is not resorted to by members of Upper Castes or members of Elite Class.”

– Hon’ble Justice Arun Mishra, Union of India v. State of Maharashtra, [Criminal Appeal No. 416 of 2018].

Francis Coralie Mullin v. State (UT of Delhi), (1981) 1 SCC 608 recognized, right to life includes right to live with human dignity. Witchcraft is certainly one practice which should be shunned. Witchcraft is deeply intertwined with superstition, patriarchy and social control.

– Hon’ble Justice Sanjay Karol, Rajeev Kumar Upadhyay v. Srikant Upadhyay, [Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10447 of 2024] decided on 19.12.2024.