theleaflet

The Supreme Courts ruling in Nagaraj Mylandla does more than uphold a foreign award. It imports a doctrine that could finally stop award-debtors from treating Indian courts as a second appellate forum.

Senior Advocate Indira Jaising opened arguments for Respondents by placing exclusion at the heart of her submissions and arguing that the Constitution, as the grundnorm, admits of no higher norm, and certainly not one built on notions of pollution and defilement.

As the Supreme Court keeps the SIR in suspension, lawyers across the West Bengal bar, including the grandson of a former Rajya Sabha MP, have had their names struck off electoral rolls, with many appellate tribunals still in complete dysfunction.

As the review petitioners wrapped up, the nine-judge Bench heard wide-ranging submissions on who can challenge religious practices, whether Article 25(2) can override denominational autonomy under Article 26, and whether the 2018 Sabarimala judgment itself is liable to be recalled.

As eighty students in Aligarh Muslim Universitys law school protest against withholding of marksheets, potentially against a Delhi High Court ruling, an alumnus reflects on deeper systemic problems in the varsity from maladministration, to a fall in academic output.

Three weeks on, the Review Petitioners in the Sabarimala Reference emphasise on legislative morality, non-believers filing PILs against religious practices, harmonious reading of Articles 25 and 26, and limits of the ERP test on Islamic practices.

In this Preface to the Law & Technology column by The Leaflet, Justice (Retd.) Gautam Patel reflects on what binds law and codes, whether law itself is code, and why archaic courtroom practices have long lagged behind the rapid technological change.

In this personal account, human rights lawyer and founder of Peoples Watch, Henri Tiphagne recalls how a routine MHA inspection in 2012 spiralled into a 14-year battle of suspensions, CBI raids and court hearings. And why, despite it all, he will not relent.

As parties challenging the 2018 Sabarimala judgment continue their arguments, major questions emerge on Article 25 and 26s interrelationship, the meaning of morality and religious denomination and the limits of temple entry.

The headlines across many major dailies flashed a title that raised questions among many well-reasoned readers Opposition stands, Womens bill falls, suggested one of Indias most read papers, with 1.6 million readers, referring to the defeat of the passage of the 131st Constitution Amendment Bill and two other legislations.

Justice Sharma noted that the Court cannot be so fragile as to yield to imaginary apprehension of bias against the institution and should adjudicate in adherence to the Constitution and the law rather than unfounded insinuations.

On the fifth day of hearings before the nine-judge Constitution Bench, senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan also proposed a broad reading of the word denomination as Justice B.V. Nagarathna supported using the term sampradaya instead.

In its response to The Leaflet, TNNLUs Registrar stated that the VCs remarks were made as fatherly figure, even as students demand a formal student council, POSH policy and class representatives resigned en-masse.