Whether the State can Force Citizens to Give Up their Rights in Exchange for Government Benefits? An Analysis in Light of Aarogya Setu being made Mandatory for Getting Bail

In this article, the authors discuss whether the government can force the citizens to give up their Fundamental Rights to avail a government benefit, in light of the recent Jharkhand High Court order which made it mandatory for an under-trial to download the Aarogya Setu Application in order to get a bail. Continue reading Whether the State can Force Citizens to Give Up their Rights in Exchange for Government Benefits? An Analysis in Light of Aarogya Setu being made Mandatory for Getting Bail

Ramos v. Louisiana: The US Supreme Court’s Interesting Take on the Doctrine of Stare Decisis

In this article, the author seeks to analyse both, the majority and the dissenting opinion, of the US Supreme Court, offered in the interpretation of the doctrine of stare decisis in Ramos v Louisiana. The author concludes by arguing as to why the Sixth Amendment right shall be applicable against the States and not only against the Federal Government. Continue reading Ramos v. Louisiana: The US Supreme Court’s Interesting Take on the Doctrine of Stare Decisis

Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill 2019: A Regressive Move on the Verge of Becoming a Reality

In this post, the authors discuss the Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill 2019 and highlight the various perspectives the bill fails to take into account and the implications of its prejudiced outlook. From how certain medical phenomena remain unengaged with, to the failure to recognise the state of the ground reality of society, this piece is an expansive overview of what lacks in the bill and what could have been better.
Continue reading Surrogacy (Regulation) Bill 2019: A Regressive Move on the Verge of Becoming a Reality

Stepmotherly Treatment Given to Commercial Speech under Article 19(1): A Critical Analysis of the Existing Hierarchy

In this post, the author attempts to criticise the little protection granted to commercial speech, argues that the distinction made between commercial speech and non-commercial speech in court decisions is based on absurd grounds and appeals to grant equal protection to such speech as a fundamental right. Continue reading Stepmotherly Treatment Given to Commercial Speech under Article 19(1): A Critical Analysis of the Existing Hierarchy

Are the Indian Courts Still Following the Constitutional Principle of Dualism? Not Quite So

In this post, the author examines how the recent trend adopted by the Supreme Court is going against the constitutional principle of dualism and separation of power. The article provides a comparative analysis of the situation prevalent in developed nations like the UK and the USA. Continue reading Are the Indian Courts Still Following the Constitutional Principle of Dualism? Not Quite So

Right to Reservation: Should it Really be at State’s Discretion?

In this post, Gunjan Shrivastav and Jay Bhaskar Sharma discuss the various implications of the recent apex court judgment which has gone on to establish that the State Government is in no way bound to provide quantifiable data to justify not providing reservation. It discusses the various facets of law and explores how the decision may be both constitutionally invalid and detrimental from a public policy perspective.
Continue reading Right to Reservation: Should it Really be at State’s Discretion?

Untouchability: The Inadequacy of Purity-Pollution Analysis: Part II (Discrimination on Grounds of Race and Place of Birth)

In the concluding post of the two-part blog series on the inadequacy of the purity-pollution analysis of untouchability, Uttara Vijayakumar examines how the prohibition of discrimination based on race and place of birth is also underwritten by notions of supremacy and inferiority, thus culling out notions of supremacy and inferiority as the scheme of Article 15(2). Continue reading Untouchability: The Inadequacy of Purity-Pollution Analysis: Part II (Discrimination on Grounds of Race and Place of Birth)