The nine-judge bench in Jai Bir Singh spent pages saying what “industry” is not, leaving open the definition Justice Krishna Iyer settled in 1978 and extending a dispute that has already run through decades of industrial adjudication.
The victims of the 2024 Bangladesh violence deserve genuine accountability. But the proceedings against Sheikh Hasina raise cumulative concerns about the Bangladesh International Crimes Tribunal’s constitutional foundation, judicial independence, evidentiary scrutiny and appellate safeguards. India must note that its refusal to extradite need not mean abandonment of accountability.
The ex-Bangladesh PM’s return following a death sentence imposed in absentia brings renewed attention to the International Crimes Tribunal’s troubled record on fair trial guarantees, retrospective criminalization and capital punishment, while raising difficult questions for India over extradition.
A nine-judge bench, by majority, has refined but not overturned the triple test in Bangalore Water Supply for what counts as an ‘industry’ under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.
The finding by the Commission headed by Justice S. Murlidhar provide a substantial evidentiary basis for investigating war crimes and crimes against humanity and, more controversially, reopen the debate on the interpretation of genocide in contemporary international law.
A deluge of videos document the Delhi police resorting to pellet shots, nail-studded lathis, tear gas, and even assaulting women protestors on July 20. By every metric, it impinged the principles of proportionality and minimal use of force.
With all its deep imperfections around affordability and foreign policy, America – a nation built by immigrants – has sustained a constitutional structure that has securely housed democracy for two and a half centuries.
While the ICJ has affirmed the right to strike in principle, its silence on the right’s scope and the authority of the ILO’s supervisory bodies risks leaving the verdict an unfinished promise.
Following mass exclusions from the electoral rolls, the West Bengal government has made SIR inclusion mandatory for access to PDS benefits. Does linking citizenship to welfare and labour benefits have any statutory basis? And how can the judiciary intervene?