In this interview conducted by CLS, we talk to Shristi Borthakur. As an advocate practicing in the Delhi High Court, her role in high-profile constitutional cases and her contributions to shaping significant legal principles have greatly influenced both the legal profession and public policy in India. She has particularly been involved in a few landmark cases, such as Dr Sarbesh Bhattacharjee v. State NCT of Delhi and Supriyo & Anr. v. Union of India, which have been instrumental in advancing constitutional principles and shaping the jurisprudence of our country.
The Boundless ‘India’: Why Section 152 May Silence More Than Section 124A
This blog piece examines the implications of Section 152 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, India's new sedition law, which replaces "Government established by law; with the amorphous concept of 'India'. It critiques the potential for increased censorship and arbitrary interpretation, posing threats to free speech and democratic dissent.
Reforming Special Leave Petitions: A Two-Tier Approach to Streamline the Supreme Court’s Workload
The blog analyzes the inefficiencies arising from frivolous Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) in India's Supreme Court, proposing a two-tier system featuring a quasi-judicial panel to assess SLPs, thereby enhancing efficiency while preserving the Court's power.
Battling Digital Disinformation: The Imperative of Fact-Checking in a Participatory Democracy (Part II)
Disinformation and misinformation has been earmarked as a ‘global risk’, causing ‘information pollution’ that adversely impacts decision making and socio-economic and political stability. Part – II intends to explore the evolving interpretation of the theory of ‘marketplace of ideas’ under Article 19(1)(a) to point out that disinformation and misinformation on government affairs distorts the foundation of democracy, i.e., truth. Accordingly, the article emphasises on the need to fact-check in order to ensure plurality of views based on factually true information, since discourse based on false information makes the citizen's participation in democracy a futile exercise.
Battling Digital Disinformation: The Imperative of Fact-Checking in a Participatory Democracy (Part I)
Disinformation and misinformation has been earmarked as a ‘global risk’, causing ‘information pollution’ that adversely impacts decision making and socio-economic and political stability. In light of this, Part – I of this Article aims to expplain the imperative and constitutionality of the Fact-Check Unit (FCU) under Rule 3(1)(b)(v) of the IT Rules, 2021, through a comparative study.
Bizarre Bail: The Rise of Unconventional Conditions in Indian Jurisprudence
This article attempts to explore the growing trend of unconventional bail conditions in Indian courts, focusing on two key cases: Frank Vitus v. Narcotics Control Bureau and Faizal v. State of Madhya Pradesh. It analyzes the latter on the basis of principles of fairness, proportionality, and justice established in the former, urging the judiciary to re-evaluate its approach.
Deliberation as a Constitutional Requirement: Examining the Judicial Review of Legislative Process in India (Part II)
This article, in two parts examines the constitutional implications of non-deliberative legislative processes in India, focusing on recent controversial laws like the electoral bonds scheme. It argues that deliberation is integral to parliamentary democracy and proposes that courts should be empowered to review legislative processes on grounds of non-deliberativeness to uphold constitutional values and improve democratic outcomes.
One Giant Leap for Intersectionality: Analysis of M. Sameeha Barvin v Joint Secretary
The concept of intersectionality continues to elude judges. While the concept has been applied in a few Supreme Court judgements such as Patan Jamal Valli and Navtej Johar, it is still not easy to understand ‘how’ courts should apply intersectionality. In this article, the Author focuses on the M. Sameeha Barvin v Joint Secretary case from the Madras High Court that throws light on intersectionality. The Author argues that the case acts as an instructive manual on how courts can apply intersectionality in matters of discrimination.
Consent to Die: A Right or a Risk?
This article analyses the validity of consent given in euthanasia and Right to Die by discussing it through a philosophical and logical discourse. It also puts a spotlight on the lack of legislation and regulation on this regard, and analyses if Right to Die is a viable right.
Outlawing Marital Rape: A recurrently validated crime
Till date, marital rape is not considered a crime in India. Through the article, the Author aims to explain why the judiciary needs to urgently intervene and declare marital rape as unconstitutional. Taking the marital status of the perpetrator and the victim as a defence, the consent of a woman to sexual intercourse has been repeatedly de-prioritised by various High Courts in recent times. Further, the Author analyses some cases to show how consent cannot be easily detected, but a look into the totality of the circumstances helps determine the same. Lastly, the Author provides suggestions for dealing with marital rape as an offence.
Conserving Dialects: Bridging the Gap Amidst Law and Fact
Every person's life is shaped and defined by their use of language. It is a haven for culture and educational systems in addition to being an effective communication tool. Life's many activities and components are derived from one's mother tongue. By providing people and communities with the requisite skills, that have been accruing and developing over centuries, language helps them in becoming accustomed to their surroundings. The last few decades have borne witness to the disappearance and even extinction of some of these minority languages as a consequence of a lack of adequately formulated provisions and discrimination. The Article aims to decipher the philosophy of Commissions meant to protect linguistic minority rights and the repercussions it has on the education sector of vulnerable sections, especially the tribal people. It also contains certain recommendations in order to combat the problem of the endangerment of languages in hopes of safeguarding India's rich cultural heritage.
The Delhi Water Crisis Case: Activism or Overreach?
The Supreme Court gave a landmark decision in the Delhi water crisis case. The Author attempts to decode certain aspects of the judgement, focusing on its directive to release Yamuna river water amid acute scarcity in the capital. It examines the legal intricacies surrounding the Court's jurisdiction, the implications for water management, and the dynamics of inter-state water disputes. Central to the discussion is the debate over whether the Court's intervention signifies judicial activism or exceeds its constitutional mandate. By analyzing these complexities, the Article underscores the judiciary's role in ensuring equitable outcomes and protecting fundamental rights in critical public interest matters.