Conservative rulings by Allahabad High Court spark concern

Radical shift from liberal torchbearer to conservative castle

Society

February 3, 2025

/ By / New Delhi

Conservative rulings by Allahabad High Court spark concern

Allahabad High Court has found itself under scrutiny for the actions of certain judges whose remarks and decisions have raised concerns (Photo: Wikimedia)

The Allahabad High Court, one of India's oldest judicial institutions, has long been a key player in shaping the country's legal landscape through bold and often controversial judgments. However, in recent years, certain rulings and remarks by its judges have raised concerns about the court’s direction, with some suggesting a shift towards more regressive and politically sensitive stances.

Rate this post

Recently, the Allahabad High Court, which boasts a legacy marked by both courageous and, at times, controversial judgments, in a case observed that marriage between two Hindus cannot be dissolved within one year of marriage on grounds of mutual incompatibility, unless there is exceptional hardship or exception depravity as provided under Section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955.

The high court, established in 1866, stands as one of India’s oldest judicial bodies. Over the years, the institution became known for its bold interpretations of the law, its stance on the protection of fundamental rights, and its willingness to tackle some of the most sensitive issues in Indian society, However, its more recent judgements and stance on sensitive issues show a shift towards a more conservative and sometimes cautious in comparison to its past.

“Historically, the Allahabad High Court, like many other courts in India, has been instrumental in advancing progressive judgments, especially in cases relating to civil liberties, human rights, and social justice. However, in recent years, some of its decisions have been perceived as more conservative or cautious in comparison to its past,” Anshum Verma, an advocate based in Delhi, tells Media India Group.

Anshum Verma

Anshum Verma

From the landmark judgment disqualifying Prime Minister Indira Gandhi in 1975 to its rulings on gender justice and workers’ rights, the Allahabad High Court has often been at the forefront of India’s legal evolution.

One of the most defining moments in the court’s history came in 1975 when Justice Jagmohanlal Sinha delivered a judgment that disqualified then-Prime Minister Indira Gandhi for election malpractice. In the case of Indira Nehru Gandhi versus Raj Narain, the court held that she had used undue advantage in securing her election victory, leading to her disqualification.

This decision sent shockwaves throughout the nation and directly contributed to the declaration of the Emergency, during which civil liberties were suspended and political dissent silenced.

Ayodhya Land Dispute

The Allahabad High Court also made headlines in 2010 with its judgment on the Ayodhya land dispute, one of the most contentious religious conflicts in India’s modern history. In M Siddiq versus Mahant Suresh Das, the court divided the disputed land into three equal parts, one for the Hindu deity Ram Lalla, one for the Sunni Waqf Board, and one for the Nirmohi Akhara.

Though this decision was an attempt to mediate a long-standing religious dispute, it failed to calm tensions and instead left the issue unresolved. The verdict was seen by many as a compromise that avoided taking a more definitive stand on the religious sensitivity of the matter, leaving the conflict unresolved until the Supreme Court made a final ruling in the matter in 2019.

Gender justice and personal laws

In the 1996 case of Bodhisattva Gautam versus Subhra Chakraborty, the court ruled that even divorced women are entitled to maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CRPC), if they cannot support themselves.

This decision, which echoed the principles set out by the Supreme Court in the Shah Bano case (1985), extended protection to women, especially in difficult circumstances. The court has also been involved in upholding women’s rights within the framework of personal laws, contributing to the ongoing debate over the reform of marriage and divorce laws in India.

Transparency and workers’ rights

Its landmark 1999 decision in K K Verma versus Union of India established the right to information (RTI) as a constitutional right, bolstering democratic transparency. Similarly, its 2003 judgment in UP State Road Transport Corporation versus V K Sinha focused on improving the working conditions of contractual workers in state-run corporations, underscoring the Court’s commitment to workers’ rights.

Controversial remarks and accountability

However, in recent years, the Allahabad High Court has found itself under scrutiny for the actions of certain judges whose remarks and decisions have raised concerns about the institution’s evolving nature.

“The society as a whole has turned conservative, culturally nationalistic, majoritarian, over the last decade and courts are but a reflection of the society in which they exist; and second is that our courts are progressively weaker when it comes to standing up to the pressure from super majority parliaments and powerful centralising executive. Powerful dissents like in ADM Jabalpur, where Justice HR Khanna chose to give up his Chief Justiceship of India, than to side with the government seems more impossible than ever. From electoral bonds, article 370, CAA, UAPA, Delhi riots, marital rape, demonetisation, Rafael Fighter Jets, Ayodhya, Gyanvapi mosque excavation, Kashmir internet shutdown, Central Vista, Pegasus Spyware, slum demolitions to Delhi govt versus LG, there has not been a single case of consequence where the courts have delivered a judgement against a strong stand of the Central Government,” Choudhary Ali Zia Kabir, a human rights advocate based in Delhi tells Media India Group.

Choudhary Ali Zia Kabir

Judges of the court like Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav have come under fire for controversial statements that reflect a more orthodox, and at times, regressive approach to certain issues. At an event organised by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), Justice Yadav reportedly said, “This is India, and it will be run as per the wishes of its majority,” a statement that has been criticised for undermining the principles of secularism enshrined in the Indian Constitution.

“Allahabad High Court has its own share of controversy from its handling of Hathrap Gangrape case, Azaan loudspeaker ban, to refusing protection to interfaith couples, to sitting judges making derogatory remarks against Muslims. It reflects a broader sadder trend within the India judiciary,” adds Kabir.

Another example of the court’s controversial turn came in the handling of the Muzaffarnagar riots case, where certain rulings were perceived to downplay the role of communal violence and were criticised for not adequately addressing the rights of victims.

Additionally, the Court’s response to the ‘Love Jihad’ debate, a controversial narrative surrounding interfaith marriages has raised concerns about its growing entanglement in matters that appear to prioritise religious conservatism over individual rights.

In a recent ruling, the Allahabad High Court has said that the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 applies not only to married couples but also to live-in partners.

A single bench of the court, comprising Justice Renu Agarwal, gave the ruling while dismissing a petition filed by a live-in interfaith couple seeking police protection. A Muslim woman and a Hindu man had married in a temple and applied for the registration of their marriage online, which was pending. The couple had approached the high court seeking police protection as they apprehended threats to their lives.

“Conversion is not only required for the purpose of marriage, but it is also required for the purpose of marriage, but it is also required in all relationships in the nature of marriage, therefore, the Conversion Act applies to relationships in the nature of marriage or live-in relationship. The petitioners have not yet applied for conversion as per provisions of Section 8 and 9 of the Act, hence, the relationship of petitioners cannot be protected in contraventions of the provisions of law,” the court said.

While the Allahabad High Court’s historical role has been that of a bold institution that has often pushed the boundaries of progressive law, recent judgments and the conduct of some of its judges suggest a worrying trend toward regressive, and at times, controversial positions.

Judges who make statements reflecting religious bias or appear to give preference to majoritarian views may signal a departure from the institution’s commitment to fairness and constitutional justice.

YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

0 COMMENTS

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *