Indira Gandhi’s declaration of a National Emergency in 1975 suspended fundamental rights, notably Article 21 and 226, impacting citizens’ liberties. During that period, it wasn’t individuals facing trial but the courts themselves under scrutiny. While the Madhya Pradesh High Court found the suspension of rights unconstitutional, the Supreme Court’s decision, save for Justice HR Khanna’s dissent, left a lasting impact, emphasizing the importance of liberty and constitutional values.
Today, a similar scenario unfolds—an undeclared Emergency where fundamental rights are violated without their official suspension. Critics face repercussions, and there’s a trend of ‘jail not bail,’ especially in cases critical of the government. This targets journalists, students, and activists advocating for the marginalized.
There’s concern over the disregard for legal principles, using questionable evidence to convict, and the misuse of laws like the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and Gangsters Act. Minority and Dalit harassment often goes unpunished, while those who criticize the government are prosecuted. Law procedures seem to falter, with selective prosecutions of public servants based on political affiliations.
The judiciary’s independence is questioned amidst delayed justice, selective handling of cases involving public servants, and the shifting of sensitive cases to benches unfamiliar with their history. This erosion of democratic features occurs with the courts often staying silent during critical junctures.
Ultimately, amidst this pseudo-Emergency, it’s not the accused on trial but the very foundations of our democracy being tested daily.
Get unlimited unrestricted access to thousands of insightful content at ConsultEase.
payu form placeholder
If you already have a premium membership,
Sign In.
