Indian Judicial System

[shravanp]

https://x.com/arunpudur/status/1982394214014173540
@arunpudur
Supreme Court REFUSES to BAN Child Marriage BAN to all faiths, REJECTING the Centre’s plea to enforce the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act (PCMA) over personal laws.

Mi Lords are so sacred of STSJ gang. Such a shameful collegium appointees. Time to revamp Judiciary.

No, this is ridiculous and half hearted attempt by Center to throw the decision making at Courts. Going by triple-talaq process, first step is to bring in the legislation and then have it criminalize it. Then courts would be bound by that.

[Sachin]

No, this is ridiculous and half hearted attempt by Center to throw the decision making at Courts. Going by triple-talaq process, first step is to bring in the legislation and then have it criminalize it. Then courts would be bound by that.

100% agreed. And this is why legislations have to be worded correctly. By making laws ambiguous the Central Government is allowing such laws to be interpreted by the judiciary using their own whims and fancy logic. And then sitting and crying is of no use. Central government is handing over the stick to beat itself, to another party who can use it effectively. BJP has every ways and means to introduce a small amendment bill to the parent act and get this sorted out quickly. But seeing Modi & BJP of late, I am not sure whether this would be done.

[shravanp]

I share the same concern. Its going to be 12 years of rule, and some of these low-hanging fruits could have huge impact on society, are largely left untouched. Especially religious personal laws. Possibly no action is taken on them because they might come under the ambit of larger debate on Uniform Civil Code. I don't see any legal hurdle in that. In fact, it is probably most pro-secular and pro-democratic idea to being in one common law that enforces applicability on all religious demographics. Other gurus might chime in on what is stopping Modi government to go full throttle on UCC.

[Vayutuvan]

Other gurus might chime in on what is stopping Modi government to go full throttle on UCC.

In the third term, their MP numbers shrank. They also lost KTK and TG.

[uddu]

https://x.com/RakeshKishore_l/status/19 ... 3349243340
@RakeshKishore_l
This mialord Judge should be suspnded & arrested for behaving like a Islamic J!hadi while being a Judge in India

A Mus!im girl married a Hindu man but Judge now wants Hindu to be arrested & also wants him to convert to Is!am.

Are these judges following Sh@ria

[uddu]

https://x.com/RShivshankar/status/1984133578633175195
@RShivshankar
One day, if they don't get to her first, Nupur Sharma might appear before CJI Kant. At present Sharma is bravely tempting fate to help others fight for justice. (See below).
A fate Justice Kant implied she was “single-handedly responsible for". Result: free run for "STJ" gang.

[uddu]

https://x.com/ArunKrishnan_/status/1984070669529968846
@ArunKrishnan_
Can someone lawyer explain to me why Indira Jaisingh can list that ridiculous case of hers directly in the Supreme Court? Why isn't she required, like all mango citizens, to start from the district level courts and work her way up?

Gazab ka privilege hai bhai.

[Sachin]

Can someone lawyer explain to me why Indira Jaisingh can list that ridiculous case of hers directly in the Supreme Court? Why isn't she required, like all mango citizens, to start from the district level courts and work her way up?

This is done by smart mis-use of Article 32 Constituition of India. This allows a person to directly approach Supreme Court stating that fundamental rights are being violated. Earlier this provision was mainly used for filing writ petitions (Habeous Corpus writ, most of the times). This over a period of time, and with Supreme Court diluting the conditions of locus standi*, enabled people to start the Public Interest Litigation business. The usual members of the Supreme Court lawyer cabal; Kapil Sibal, Indira Jai Singh, Abhishek Manu Singhvi all gets their cases heard at supreme court using the PIL tactic.

*locus standi means the legal position or right of some one to be part of a court proceeding. Usually; the person in some way has to be losing or denied some right or claim. He cannot file cases on behalf of third parties.