A new book on Didi Contractor places her among her among the unique architects of India.

An official endorsement by the government of what constitutes Indian art and design is not just troubling from the standpoint of its content, but also for the fact that art should be so brazenly claimed by the government.

The top court extended S.K. Mishra's tenure until the middle of September at the executive's request. In doing so, the court has sent a signal that in India, there is one entity – and one entity alone – that is entitled to take advantage of its own wrong, not once, not twice, but many times over.

There is no doubt that the Supreme Court's judgment in this case is a valuable contribution to proportionality jurisprudence. However, the sheer complexity of the tests laid down makes this very much a case of “the proof of the pudding”.

The judgment in Anoop Baranwal is a valuable first step in the direction of a structurally independent Election Commission.

What we need is an appointments process that genuinely safeguards judicial independence from executive dominance.

It is worth repeating that a judgment based on secret evidence is no judgment at all: it fails the most basic tests of the rule of law in a constitutional democracy.

The history of the demonetisation case has already seen the unfortunate deployment of two recent judicial tools that inure to the benefit of the executive: judicial evasion and the sealed cover.

The judgments denying bail to Jyoti Jagtap and Umar Khalid – from the Bombay and Delhi high courts respectively – reveal that UAPA adjudication continues to be inconsistent and judge-centric.

CJI Ramana’s determination to avoid crucial constitutional cases with a ten-foot pole crosses the line from judicial caution to judicial pusillanimity: no matter how difficult the situation, there is no excuse for the court refusing to do its job.

Some of the cases that Justice Khanwilkar has handled involve the most basic and crucial civil rights in our constitution. How did he tackle them?

Some of the cases that Justice Khanwilkar has handled involve the most basic and crucial civil rights in our constitution. How did he tackle them?

In the case questioning the spate of recent property demolitions across states, the Supreme Court bench has passed rhetorical orders and refused to use its power to do substantive justice.

Demolition cases are, at present, being treated on an individual basis. But it is only from the pattern of home demolitions that the court can extrapolate the fact that collective punishment has become an informal part of state policy.

The bail order takes us to a position where the prosecution can write literally anything in its UAPA chargesheet and the court will park all objections for a trial that will not finish for the next ten years.

The court should have recognised that educational spaces in a plural and diverse society ought to reflect its plurality and diversity, and facilitating the freedom of choice and expression is one crucial way to achieve that.

Current figures on social and development issues have landed India at the bottom of the livable index scale. But as long as the temple continues to function as the state and the state as the temple, little is likely to change.

It behoves a court – when it is going to uphold a total ban on free speech – to explain in at least some fashion how that ban is justified and how the four-step proportionality test has been satisfied.

Looking back at the past year, India has a lot of scope for self-improvement. As 2021 draws to a close, it would be instructive to ask: if India were a person, what could some of its New Year's resolutions be?

Obviously, there is a place for politics in comedy. But the comic rationale should not be compromised by single-minded nationalistic – or 'anti-nationalistic' – rhetoric.