Pairokar

 The Supreme Court of India’s direction to enhance the retirement age of judicial officers in the district judiciary from 60 to 62 years is a welcome and much-needed step. A three-judge Bench, headed by the Chief Justice of India, Justice Surya Kant, and comprising Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V. Mohana, has directed seven consenting States—Chhattisgarh, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal—to amend their respective service rules to formally raise the age of superannuation from 60 to 62 years. The Court has further directed the remaining States and Union Territories to take an urgent decision, in consultation with their respective High Courts, within two weeks on adopting the enhanced retirement age. However, the enhancement to 62 years is not automatic. Judicial officers attaining the age of 60 years will be required to undergo a rigorous assessment of their suitability and performance by the concerned High Court before being permitted ...

  Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has recently raised a pertinent question: why, even after 76 years of the Constitution, has the Supreme Court of India never appointed a distinguished jurist as a judge of the Court? The question deserves serious consideration because the Constitution expressly provides for such a possibility. Article 124(3) makes a person eligible for appointment as a Judge of the Supreme Court if he or she is, in the opinion of the President, a “distinguished jurist.” Interestingly, this qualification is specifically provided for the Supreme Court and not for the High Courts. The Constitution, therefore, deliberately kept open a route for bringing persons from outside the conventional pool of judges and practising advocates directly to the Supreme Court. Justice Bhuyan observed that when the collegium system did not exist, one explanation offered by the Central Government was that there was not sufficient depth in Indian academia for distinguished academics to be seriously ...

Jainism has been one of the finest sects of Hinduism. However, in practice, it has adopted not only all the evil practices of Hinduism but, in many ways, has gone far beyond it. There are five Mahavratas or anuvratas in Jainism. They are Ahimsa (Non-violence): It demands absolute non-injury to all living beings—subtle or complex—in thought, speech, and physical action. That is why Jain munis observe chaturmas and do not move from one place to another, lest any insect die in their movement. Satya (Truthfulness) is the second Vrat, which ordains speaking the truth with kindness and restraint, avoiding deceit or speech that causes harm. Asteya (Non-stealing): Not taking anything that is not willingly given, including abstaining from exploitation or unfair acquisition. Brahmacharya (Celibacy): Complete sexual abstinence for monastics, and strict fidelity and sensory restraint for householders. Aparigraha (Non-possessiveness/Non-attachment): Detachment from material possessions, wealth, a...

  The scene created by Mrs Sonia Gandhi at the Congress Headquarters on 15 th August, while Vande Mataram was being sung, was deplorable. The conduct of Rahul Gandhi, the Congress leader, and Mallikarjun Kharge was equally condemnable. But what Mrs Sonia Gandhi did was particularly inexcusable. The historical record surrounding Vande Mataram makes the episode even more significant. Gurudev Rabindranath Tagore sang Vande Mataram at the Calcutta Session of the Indian National Congress in 1896. The song subsequently became deeply associated with India's national movement and was adopted for all-India occasions at the Banaras session of the Congress in 1905. In 1923, at the Kakinada Session of the Congress, when Pandit Vishnu Digambar Paluskar sang Vande Mataram . Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar, who was presiding over the session, objected to the singing and walked out in protest. The controversy took a further institutional turn in 1937. The Congress Working Committee decided t...

The Government of India must formally recognise the newly declared Government of Balochistan. For all practical purposes, Balochistan has severed its ties with Pakistan. The Baloch people never acceded to Pakistani rule in spirit, culminating in their long-awaited declaration of independence on August 11th. As Pakistan’s principal military quadrant and home to its strategic nuclear assets—now effectively under Baloch control—the changing dynamics in Quetta demand an immediate response. The Government of India’s silence on this unfolding reality is baffling. Pragmatic realpolitik dictates that India takes the lead in rallying international recognition for an independent Balochistan. Neither the military nor civil writ of Islamabad holds sway over Baloch territory any longer. For decades, the authoritarian, Punjab-dominated military apparatus maintained a heavy-handed grip on the region, suppressing its persistent demands for freedom. Accounting for nearly 350,000 square kilometres...

  Justice P. S. Kailasam, who served on the Supreme Court in the 1970s, once observed that on Mondays and Fridays the Court heard roughly 280 Special Leave Petitions (SLPs), and nearly half of them were admitted. Today, the picture is dramatically different. More than 96,000 cases are pending before the Supreme Court of India, with some litigants waiting for justice for over three decades. Incidentally, Justice Kailasam was the father-in-law of senior Congress leader P. Chidambaram and the father of designated senior advocate Nalini Chidambaram. P Chidambaram also finds mention in K. K. Venugopal's recent memoir, An Accidental Lawyer: My Adventures in Law and Life . Nonagenarian KK Venugopal is himself a legendary lawyer. In a written reply to the Rajya Sabha, Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal stated the other day that the Supreme Court has 96,024 pending cases, including 10,094 pending for more than ten years, 558 pending for over twenty years, and 26 cases that have remain...