Harsh Mander: A judge guided by god, a case of constitutional morality, a ruling that failed India
DY Chandrachud raises troubling questions by publicly professing that religious beliefs, not the Constitution, influenced the Ayodhya judgement.
Join our WhatsApp Community to receive travel deals, free stays, and special offers!
- Join Now -
Join our WhatsApp Community to receive travel deals, free stays, and special offers!
- Join Now -
In the history of free India, the Supreme Court of India has authored many momentous rulings. Some ushered in regimes of public interest litigation and social rights on questions such as bonded labour, informal worker rights, the right to food and education and the rights of homeless people. Others promoted rights and protection of women survivors of sexual violence and sexual harassment. Many upheld and safeguarded fundamental freedoms such as a free and independent media. In these and many different ways, the Supreme Court guarded and deepened India’s secular democratic Constitution.
The Supreme Court’s November 2019 decision to award the title in Ayodhya of a small piece of land in favour of the Hindu litigants was also momentous, but in a profoundly different way. On this land had stood a medieval mosque built by a military commander of the first Mughal emperor Babar from 1528-29, until it was razed by a frenzied mob in 1992. The marauding mob was cheered on by LK Advani and other senior leaders of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and Bharatiya Janata Party. The court directed the Centre to constitute a trust to build at the contested site a temple to Ram, and with this gave a judicial stamp...
