FrontLine - - LETTERS -

IT is sur­pris­ing that a Supreme Court that con­sti­tuted a bench at 1:15 a.m. to hear a pe­ti­tion in May 2018 re­lat­ing to the swear­ing-in of B.S. Yed­dyu­rappa in Kar­nataka is now in no hurry to take up the Sabari­mala re­view pe­ti­tion (“Pil­grim­age pol­i­tics”, De­cem­ber 7). The lone dis­sent­ing judge was right when she said the court could not im­pose its ra­tio­nal­ity on mat­ters of re­li­gion.

With over 50,000 cases pend­ing in the apex court and around three crore cases pend­ing for the past 10 years in lower courts, should courts ven­ture into ar­eas re­served for the ex­ec­u­tive and the leg­is­la­ture?

B.R. Ambed­kar be­lieved that the Supreme Court should be eas­ily ac­ces­si­ble to the com­mon man. It is time the apex court re­verted to the sta­tus quo ante on Sabari­mala.



Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.