Judiciary
The Campaign for Judicial Accountability and Reforms (CJAR) strongly deprecates the unconscionable remarks made by the Chief Justice of India, Justice Surya Kant during two important hearings on 29th January. These remarks have attacked people’s fundamental rights to work and equality, and diminished faith in the Supreme Court. The verbal observations made in these two important cases, represent a troubling departure from the constitutional discipline, erudition, and restraint expected of a judge occupying the highest judicial office in the country.
First, while dismissing a PIL seeking a comprehensive legal framework and enforcement of minimum wages for domestic workers, Justice Surya Kant observed that “trade unionism has been largely responsible for stopping industrial growth in the country”, that such unionisation doesn’t work, that other means (other than such collective bargaining through unionisation) need to be put in place for countering exploitation and strangely, by some perverse logic also suggested that “once minimum wages are fixed, people may refuse to hire. Every-household will be dragged into litigation” and the workers will ultimately suffer.
Such utterances, delivered by the Chief Justice’s bench, are not casual remarks. Apart from being reflective of a judge’s personal biases, they carry the weight of institutional authority. Such statements can go on to influence how the judiciary at all levels responds to the lived realities of the marginalised
03/02/2026
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Supreme Court Order Triggers Backlash: Domestic Workers’ Unions Challenge Refusal on Minimum Wages
The Supreme Court’s refusal to hear a plea seeking statutory recognition of minimum wages for domestic workers has triggered sharp pushback from workers’ unions. The decision prompted protests and public statements at a press conference in Bengaluru on February 2, where unions accused the judiciary of retreating from its constitutional responsibility toward one of India’s most vulnerable labour groups.
by Oindrila Dasgupta
03/02/2026
The year 2025 was remarkable for the Supreme Court for several reasons. For one, it completed 75 years of existence, and second, it will be remembered for the reversals of its own orders. https://thewire.in/law/supreme-court-reversed-eight-of-its-own-judgments-in-2025
The top court highlighted this “growing trend” in the November Sk. Md. Anisur Rahaman judgment. The bench comprising Justices Dipankar Datta and A.G. Masih “painfully observed” how “verdicts pronounced by Judges, whether still in office or not and irrespective of the time lapse since pronounced, [were] being overturned by succeeding benches or specially constituted benches at the behest of some party aggrieved by the verdicts prior in point of time.”
Last year the Supreme Court recalled at least eight of its own orders – three of which were passed by Justice J.B. Pardiwala’s bench – ranging from subjects like judicial discipline, environmental issues and corporate matters.
by Ritika Jain
03/01/2026
On July 5, Jaipur commercial court judge Dinesh Kumar Gupta ruled that an Adani-led firm earned more than Rs 1,400 crore in transportation charges at the cost of a Rajasthan government-owned company. https://scroll.in/article/1089325/rajasthan-judge-who-ruled-against-adani-led-firm-transferred-the-same-day
The same day, the state’s Bharatiya Janata Party government issued an order removing him from the post. Commercial court judges are appointed by state governments in concurrence with the High Court.
Two weeks later, the high court stayed Gupta’s order that imposed a Rs 50-lakh fine on the Adani-led firm and directed the Rajasthan government to request the Comptroller and Auditor General to audit the deal between the state and the conglomerate.
18/12/2025
क्या बिना न्यायिक सुधार भारत विकसित बन सकता है?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLOvqsbiGMw Mahan Bharat
This video discusses:
✅ The flaws in India’s judicial system
✅ The urgent need for “Justice Within Year, Justice For All”
✅ How timely justice can reduce corruption, fraud, and social unrest
✅ Reforms in court procedures, holidays, and language policies
✅ Why judicial reforms are essential for India to truly develop
If the Supreme Court acts decisively and implements reforms, India could see faster justice, reduced corruption, and a stronger economy.
Muralidhar cited the Supreme Court’s inaction on the suo motu contempt petition against former Uttar Pradesh chief minister Kalyan Singh, filed after the Babri Masjid was demolished in 1992. “It was not taken up for 22 years. And then when it was listed before Justice (Sanjay) Kaul it was said; why flog a dead horse. This is institutional amnesia, which in my view is unforgivable, of an act which the Supreme Court found was an egregious crime,” he said.
He also cited the Ayodhya judgment of 2019, arguing that the Court went beyond the scope of the suits before it.
“No one had asked for the construction of a temple. Directions under Article 142 were issued; no one asked for it, no legal basis, no prayer, hence no opposition. No central government or Hindu group lawyer had asked for it,” he said. The ruling, he added, “was completely outside the realm of the suits” and its fallout continues to affect the courts.
11/09/2025
Referring indirectly to former Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, widely regarded as the Ayodhya verdict’s author, he observed: “It was an author-less judgment but the author himself said he consulted the deity before (delivering) it,” reported Indian Express.
- 'Unforgivable Institutional Amnesia': Retired HC Judge Slams Judiciary's Handling of Communal Disputes
- Don’t Distort SC's Salwa Judum Ruling or Resort to Name Calling, Former Judges Tell Amit Shah
- Real Desh Bhakt
- From Bench to Bar, the Executive Tightens Its Grip on Justice
- ‘Subjecting advocate in a case to beck and call of investigating agency untenable’: SC slams practice of investigation agencies summoning lawyers, notes threat to justice administration