By K Raveendran
The New Year seems to have done some magic to the Supreme Court under the stewardship of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud. The judicial journey of 2024, though short as yet, is marked by a series of nuanced verdicts, which stand in stark contrast to the seemingly favourable tide of 2023 for the Modi government.
A seismic shift occurred when the Supreme Court annulled the Electoral Bond Scheme earlier this month, challenging the unmatched financial advantage enjoyed by the ruling party. This verdict, grounded in concerns about transparency and the “right to information,” emphasized the judiciary’s role in upholding democratic principles.
The annulment of the Electoral Bond Scheme was not merely a legal pronouncement; it was a recalibration of the delicate balance between political financing and democratic principles. The court’s assertion reinforces the democratic imperative of an informed electorate. In the aftermath, questions about the potential impact on future elections linger, as the ruling party faces a financial setback.
Close on the heels of the electoral bond setback to the ruling party came the Chandigarh mayoral election verdict, which while ensuring electoral integrity, also reignited discussions about the judiciary’s susceptibility to political influence. Accusations of bias underscore the delicate nature of the Court’s role, requiring not only legal acumen but also an acute awareness of its broader societal impact.
In the mayoral election case, the court overturned the BJP candidate’s win due to electoral misconduct, paving the way for the opposition candidate’s victory. The court found that the presiding officer deliberately defaced eight ballot papers in favour of the AAP-INC candidate, rendering them invalid. This resulted in the BJP candidate, Manoj Sonkar, being declared the winner despite receiving fewer valid votes. The court considered this misconduct by the officer a “deliberate attempt to alter the course of the election” and overturned the original results.
The two verdicts stand out as highlighting the potential for the court to act as a check on executive power, especially when policies are deemed to impinge on democratic principles. The extent of hurt felt by the ruling is clear from the reaction of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to the new development. Modi took a jibe at the Supreme Court saying a public interest litigation (PIL) would have been filed if Lord Krishna gave rice to Sudama in today’s times.
In contrast, the year 2023 appeared to be one of endorsement of the government’s policies by the apex court. Key decisions, including the Ayodhya Land Dispute, Article 370, and the CAA, aligned with the ruling party’s narrative, although it is important to avoid simplistic interpretations of these verdicts as mere endorsements.
In upholding the constitutional validity of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) while expressing concerns about potential discriminatory application, the Supreme Court struck a delicate balance. While endorsing the government’s core objective, the judiciary demonstrated its commitment to scrutinizing policies that may violate the principles of equality before the law. The concerns raised continue to fuel debates and may lead to further legal battles, reflecting the ongoing tension between security imperatives and constitutional values. The Court, in upholding the CAA, endorsed the government’s stance on expediting citizenship for non-Muslim minorities facing religious persecution. Yet, by raising concerns about potential discrimination, it planted seeds for ongoing dialogue and legal scrutiny.
The Ayodhya verdict fulfilled a longstanding promise but carries implications for India’s secular fabric. The Article 370 decision, hailed as historic by the BJP, had broader implications for the delicate balance between regional autonomy and national integration. The CAA judgment, despite upholding its constitutionality, sounded a cautionary note about potential discrimination.
Similarly, the Agnipath Military Recruitment Scheme verdict dismissed challenges to the scheme, which aimed to modernize the armed forces through short-term recruitment. This aligned with the government’s defence reform agenda, but questions regarding its long-term impact on recruitment quality and soldier welfare remain.
But it must be emphasised that although the judicial landscape seemed to echo the government’s agenda in 2023, a closer look reveals a judiciary keenly aware of the nuances within each decision. (IPA Service)
The post Supreme Court Sheds All Inhibitions To Act Decisively To Defend Democracy first appeared on Latest India news, analysis and reports on IPA Newspack.
