This two part series examines whether the SC’s decision in the Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India case is in consonance with the judiciary’s role in the Indian model of separation of powers. The authors argue that by attempting to interpret the existing constitutional provision, the Court has overstepped its role and altered the balance between the legal and political constitutionalism required in Indian democracy.

The post Supreme Court’s Latest Exercise of Judicial Overreach: Analysing the Anoop Baranwal Case and its Impact on Constitutionalism in India – Part II appeared first on Law and Other Things.

This two part series examines whether the SC’s decision in the Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India case is in consonance with the judiciary’s role in the Indian model of separation of powers. The authors argue that by attempting to interpret the existing constitutional provision, the Court has overstepped its role and altered the balance between the legal and political constitutionalism required in Indian democracy.

The post Supreme Court’s Latest Exercise of Judicial Overreach: Analysing the Anoop Baranwal Case and its Impact on Constitutionalism in India – Part I appeared first on Law and Other Things.

The Supreme Court held that the current system of appointment of the members of the Election Commission of India (“ECI”) gives power to the executive thereby taking away the independence of the ECI and is therefore unconstitutional.

The post Constitutional Bench Explainer Series: Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India appeared first on Law and Other Things.

In this article, the author shows how the constitutional framework for appointments to the Election Commission of India has permitted the compromise of its independent character. Through this, she posits that the new method of appointment laid down by the Supreme Court inits recent judgment of Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India is an alternative worth exploring, even though its consequences are yet to be witnessed.

The post Erosion of the ECI’s Independence: Supreme Court’s Judgment in Anoop Baranwal as a Welcome Alternative appeared first on Law and Other Things.

NLS Bangalore is pleased to announce that we are collaborating with the JSW Law School of Bhutan to launch its inaugural summer school program in June this year. The third partner in this venture is the Centre for Asian Legal Studies at the National University of Singapore. The JSW School of Law is very proud […]

The post NLS-JSW-NUS Summer School in June-July 2023 appeared first on Law and Other Things.

This explainer analyses the case of Sameena Begum v. Union of India, which primarily questions the constitutionality of the practices of nikah halala and polygamy.

The post Constitutional Bench Explainer Series: Sameena Begum v. Union of India appeared first on Law and Other Things.

With reservation being made an enabling provision in the latest jurisprudence in Mukesh Kumar, this article argues that the provisions of the Constitution in fact place a “power plus duty” upon the state to provide them. By reiterating the position of reservation as part of the extended right to equality, the article argues that the State would be duty bound to take all measures to operationalise this right.

The post Reservation under Article 16(4) of our Constitution: Placing a ‘Power plus Duty’ upon the State appeared first on Law and Other Things.

The piece critically analyses the Kaushal Kishore judgment and points out its inadequacies and flip-flops with respect to balancing Art.21 and Art.19(1)(a) rights. The author also points out the error in the Court’s interpretation of the Sakal Papers judgement and critiques the Court’s holding that Art.19 and 21 rights can be enforced even against persons other than the State or its instrumentalities.

The post Restricting Free Speech: Kaushal Kishore and the Increasing Confusion appeared first on Law and Other Things.

The author posits that ‘rights-not-to’ must be construed along a private-public spectrum in the context of its social impact. The article illustrates this by comparing Prof. Nan Hunter’s more behavioural conception of the ‘right not to marry’ versus Justice Hansaria’s more socially significant recognition of the ‘right not to live’. As such, the article also critiques the remarks on singlehood in Obergefell, in terms of its understanding of the right not to marry.

The post The Need to Legally Recognise the Right To, and the Right Not To: An Appraisal of the American Verdict Obergefell v. Hodges appeared first on Law and Other Things.

Drawing on Professor B.B. Pande’s framework on marginalisation, the article explores how criminal law marginalises communities through their invisibility. It illustrates this through the ambiguity in the Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Act, 2019 which leaves the community without the protection of a provision that penalises rape.

The post Beyond Criminalization: How Criminal Law Marginalizes through Invisibility appeared first on Law and Other Things.