The Places of Worship Act was intended to cease communal conflicts over history but it has failed to prevent conflicts such as the Gyanvapi Row. A part of this failure is attributable to the legislature’s omission to succinctly identify the existence of complex religious structures and conflicting historical experiences. This article examines the constitutionality of the Act’s provisions against the backdrop of history and provides an analysis of the ambiguity in the Act that needs rectification to ensure the true realization of justice.
Unveiling the expanded scope of “State”: When private entities take public roles
Article 12 of the Indian Constitution defines “State”. In the initial years of India’s independence, the notion of “state” was defined quite narrowly by the Supreme Court of India. It was only later that the Courts took a liberal view while interpreting “State”. Due to privatisation, there are more private organisations and corporations than ever before. It is essential that they fall under the definition of “State” in order to enforce fundamental rights against them and devolve liability in a way that escorts the devolvement of power and authority from traditional bases like governmental organs to private players. This article examines the evolving interpretation of the term “State” in the Indian Constitution in light of increasing privatization. It emphasizes the importance of safeguarding fundamental rights and explains how courts have expanded the definition of “State” to hold private entities accountable.
Love Knows No Boundaries: A Comparative Analysis of Marriage Equality Litigation in India and Costa Rica
In this piece, the author makes an analytical comparison of marriage equality litigation in Costa Rica and India and argues why the court’s decision in India must follow a similar line of thought as that adopted by the Costa Rican Court while taking into account the approach adopted by the Indian Supreme Court in the Vishaka case.
Demonetization Verdict and its Deep Overtones: It’s the time to Prioritize?
The authors, in this article, discuss the Supreme Court's growing backlog of cases. Through the example of the demonetization verdict, the authors highlight the need for prioritizing substantial legal and constitutional matters. They have also discussed recent reforms made to the case listing system and the need for broad-based reforms to address the issue of backlog.