My Lord, Courts should interpret the Constitution as it would have been understood by ordinary, reasonable citizens alive at the time the Constitution was enacted or Courts should interpret the Constitution as a living organism, one meant to evolve to suit the changing needs and values of contemporary society? “The next loss for Scalia came in […]Read more "The Nature of Judicial Power: Hon’ble Justice Antonin G. Scalia"
Two months ago, Judges 2-3-4-5 of the Indian Supreme Court wrote a long letter to the Chief Justice, complaining of assignment of Benches without any rational basis. Last Friday [*January 12, 2018*], The Judges called a Press Conference, irreversibly provoked by the Bench chosen by the Master of the Roster [The Chief Justice of India], to hear […]Read more "An Alleged Judicial Crisis on Swami Vivekananda’s 155"
The SC in Mohapatra, (2002) 8 SCC 1 had accorded primacy to the opinion of the Hon’ble Chief Justice in the consultative process for appointment of an Orissa Lokayukta. Justice Lokur in Chandrashekaraiah, (2013) 3 SCC 117 however confined the law laid down in Mohapatra to the facts of that case only. It was held that the views expressed […]Read more "Primacy of Views III: The Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013"
The SC in Justice Mohapatra, (2002) 8 SCC 1 had “accorded primacy to the opinion of the Hon’ble Chief Justice in the consultative process for appointment of Lokayukta”. We have been reminded so in Sachchidanand Gupta v. State of Uttar Pradesh, [Writ Petition (Civil) No. 872 of 2015], decided on 28.01.2016. Lokur Saab in Justice […]Read more "Primacy of Views II: Justice Mohapatra, (2002) 8 SCC 1"
Hon’ble Justice Kurian Joseph has been in the news: first, because of his tiff with CJI Dattu and second, for his contribution in the Yakub Memon Case. Gold fish have no hiding place. And therefore, the ‘briefest’ Judgment? “Historical, Textual, Structural, Prudential, Doctrinal, Episodic, Ethical” arguments aside, “there cannot be any legal sense of an issue, […]Read more "NJAC Judgment V: Kurian Joseph J"
In Mr. Justice Chandrashekaraiah (Retd.) v. Janekere C. Krishna, (2013) 3 SCC 117 it was held that the views expressed by the Chief Justice of the High Court of Karnataka have no ‘primacy’ in the process of appointment of the Lokayukta or Upa Lokayukta by the Governor of Karnataka. The High Court had taken the […]Read more "Primacy of Views I: The Karnataka Lokayukta Act"