ISSN (Print) - 0012-9976 | ISSN (Online) - 2349-8846

Search

Advanced Search

Articles by Anurag BhaskarSubscribe to Anurag Bhaskar

Reservations, Efficiency, and the Making of Indian Constitution

Vol. 56, Issue No. 19, 08 May, 2021
Anurag Bhaskar

The notion that reservation is contrary to efficiency and merit has been invoked consistently. Even the Supreme Court of India seems to have agreed withthis proposition in  some judgments, as it held that Article 16(4), which provides for reservation in services, would be limited by Article 335, which mentions the term “efficiency of administration” in the Constitution. This paper explores the Constituent Assembly Debates to show that the Constitution framers did not subject reservations to the test of efficiency or merit. In addition, “efficiency of administration” mentioned under Article 335 cannot be treated as an exclusionary construct, as it was done in pre-independence era.

 

The Myth of ‘Collective Conscience’

Vol. 55, Issue No. 15, 11 Apr, 2020
Anurag Bhaskar

India’s legal doctrine of “collective conscience” cannot be traced back to the original concept as propagated by French sociologist Emile Durkheim. The consistency with which this concept has been used by the Indian judiciary while imposing the death sentence, compels us to contemplate how it has been applied. An attempt is made in this article to present the flaws in the concept of collective conscience and in its application in India.

Constitutional Rights of Atheists and Non-believers

Vol. 53, Issue No. 38, 22 Sep, 2018
Anurag Bhaskar, Shubham Kumar

Though atheism has been socially prevalent in India, it has remained a grey area in the legal context. There are no specific laws catering to atheists and they are considered as belonging to the religion of their birth. The Constitution provides for “freedom of conscience” under Article 25 since 1950, but constitutional rights of “non-believers” were never substantiated by courts
until recently.

Damage to Democracy

Vol. 51, Issue No. 40, 01 Oct, 2016
Anurag Bhaskar

The judgment of the Supreme Court in Rajbala v State of Haryana has to be seen as a debatable one, wherein it rejected the challenge to the constitutionality of the Haryana Panchayati Raj (Amendment) Act 2015. The act disbars a large electorate in Haryana from the right to contest panchayat elections on the basis of certain restrictions like educational qualifications, arrears clause, etc. This article attempts to show how the Supreme Court has failed to protect basic civil and political rights of citizens with this ruling.

Afzal Guru's Case

Vol. 51, Issue No. 32, 06 Aug, 2016
Anurag Bhaskar

The Supreme Court is often regarded as infallible. But judges are human and the Court's verdicts should not be immune to criticism, particularly when they pertain to the death penalty. The apex court's verdict which sentenced Afzal Guru to death may not stand ground if examined in the light of the treatment of evidence in a later case.

Back to Top

EPW

Term & Policy

Circulation

Advertisement

Connect with us