The Death Penalty: In Defence of the Abolitionists

"As if one crime of such nature, done by a single man, acting individually, can be expiated by a similar crime done by all men, acting collectively."

-       Lewis Lawes,

(Warden of Sing Sing prison in New York in the 1920s and 30s)

Introduction

Do away with the Death Penalty?

On the dais of the District Court at Ratnagiri, one will find the statue of Late Shri Mancharje Pestanji Khareghat, who served in that Court as District Judge from 1895 to 1900 and again from 1904 to 1910. During his time the death sentence could only be awarded by a judge of the High Court. When Shri Khareghat was offered an elevation to the High Court, he declined on the ground that he could not, and would never be, a party to the death sentence. It is for this reason that the Ld. District Court Judge is still well known among Judges and senior members of the Bar.

The Judiciary is Independent, But Are We?

(Also read one of our previous article on 'Homosexuality In Legality' written by Shashank Sahay )

The newspapers and social networking sites are overflowing with criticism of the Supreme Court's decision Suresh Kumar Koushal & Anr. v. NAZ Foundation & Ors., which has upheld the constitutional validity of section 377 of the Indian Penal Code and upheld the illegality of homosexual intercourse.

I am reminded an incident which took place in my first year of law school. I was attending a guest lecture on 'Constitutional Jurisprudence' by the then sitting  Hon'ble Supreme Court Judge, Justice Markandey Katju. During the Q&A session, one of my professors asked the Hon'ble Judge why the judiciary was not doing anything substantial to tackle the problem of the corrupt politicians and MPs. Justice Katju shot him down immediately (not literally), "It is you who vote for these people, it is you who put them in power, and then you come crying to the courts!", Justice Katju shouted.

The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013

A Social worker on her way to fulfill her duty, following the path of humanity, saving an infant from getting married at her early age was Bhavridevi- the same woman who was brutally raped and harassed just because of the nature of her work. Popularly known as Vishaka Vs State of Rajasthan[1] is considered as the basic structure of this Act. 1997 saw Vishaka, 1999 witnessed Apparel Export Vs A.K Chopra[2] where harassment was distinguished from an attempt to sexual harassment.

SC: Execution of Will excluding certain Legal Heirs does not render it Invalid

 (Also read on Validity of Unregistered Wills and How to make a WIll.)

The Hon’ble Supreme Court, (Division Bench of Mr. Justice G.S. Singhvi and Mr. Justice Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya) in the case of Mahesh Kumar (D) By Lrs. vs Vinod Kumar & Ors  (read entire judgement here.) has held that that active participation of the propounder / beneficiary in the execution of the Will or exclusion of the natural heirs cannot lead to an inference that the Will was not genuine. 

The Hon’ble Supreme Court set aside a judgement of the Madhya Pradesh High Court which disbelieved the validity of a will executed by one Shri Harishankar to the exclusion of two of his sons.

The D.B. observed that: 

The Price of Mercy : Legalizing Medical Euthanasia

This article is written by Sourya Banerjee.

"I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel"

                                                                                                            

-The Hippocratic Oath.

Pulling the plug: (Euthanasia)
Who is to decide

    Traditionally for over 700 years, the Anglo-American common law tradition has punished or otherwise disapproved of both suicide and assisting suicide. That suicide remained a grievous, though nonfelonious, wrong is confirmed by the fact that colonial and early state legislatures and courts did not retreat from prohibiting assisting suicide. Swift, in his early 19th century treatise on the laws of Connecticut, stated that "if one counsels another to commit suicide, and the other by reason of the advice kills himself, the advisor is guilty of murder as principal." (From Z. Swift, A Digest ofthe Laws of the State of Connecticut 270 (1823). The right to life and to personal security is not only