Rohin Bhatt

In a split judgment, two judges differed on whether a Christian could be buried in a community graveyard. Instead of referring the matter to three judges the court used its power under Article 142 and directed the burial to take place 20 km away from the village. Was this consistent with the Secularism that the Constitution promises?

Despite the Supreme Court’s recent observation in Imran Pratapgarhi’s case requiring the investigating officer, before filing an FIR, to conduct a preliminary enquiry to ascertain prima facie case, the FIR against ‘Ms Medusa’ for her satirical videos repeats a very similar script

The sooner that we bury the year of Hindutva judges as an outlier, the better it will be for whatever remains in the ruins of secularism in India, writes Rohin Bhatt.

A systematic, critical reading of the Union’s submissions in the Supreme Court’s pending case on the constitutionality of the marital rape exemption is also an exercise of resistance. By re-orienting the conversation of rape trials around gender-based violence, we could respond most effectively to the backlash against feminist struggles in our courts, and outside them.

When the words of a sitting Supreme Court judge begin to resemble those of lawyers and retired judges of a certain idealogy, who conflate accountability with anti-nationalism, it is a dangerous sign, writes Rohin Bhatt.

There has been a gradual backsliding of abortion rights in India and despite the highest court employing progressive language in its judgment, their import leaves much to be desired.