Supreme Court has not acted as the ‘sentinel on the qui vive’
No Comments
Supreme Court has not acted as the ‘sentinel on the qui vive’
Topic: Indian Polity
About:
- In the last few years, the Indian Supreme Court has delivered some judgments of far- reaching consequence.
- It declared the right to privacy a fundamental right; decriminalized consensual sexual conduct between adults of the same sex; recognised transgender persons as the third gender; and outlawed triple talaq. These decisions shore up the belief in republican values like liberty and equality reified in our Constitution.
- However there are several black marks on the Supreme Court’s record. According to Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy tracker there are 25 main cases pending before the five-judge constitution bench and five cases each pending before the seven-judge and nine-judge benches. These cases relate to significant constitutional and other legal matters that can have serious repercussions on the fundamental rights of ordinary citizens and our core republican values.
- Some of the important cases gathering dust in the Supreme Court are as follows.
- First, a deluge of petitions was filed before the Supreme Court challenging the constitutionality of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, that provides non-Muslim com- munities from Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Afghanistan a fast-track route to Indian citizenship.
- Second, innumerable petitions have been filed challenging the Presidential Order of August 5, 2019 that effectually diluted Article 370 of the Constitution and split Jammu and Kashmir into two Union Territories.
- Third, petitions challenging the constitutionality of the Constitution (One Hundred and Third Amendment) Act, 2019 that provides reservations in public educational institutions and government jobs for economically weaker sections.
- Fourth Vivek Narayan Sharma v. Union of India is in the Supreme relates to the legality of demonetisation of all ₹500 and ₹1,000 notes aimed at curbing black money.
- Fifth, the Supreme Court has failed to accord proper hearing in the last four years to the constitutional challenge to the electoral bonds Constitutional duty.
