When judges' perspective, personal views, prejudices influence judgments

By NS Venkataraman*
In all democratic countries, including USA and India, judiciary has become a very decisive and powerful entity, often directing the course of events, sometimes even more than the governments by over ruling the decision of the governments. Some discerning observers think that the limits of power of judiciary are blurred and unclear.
In democratic countries, though elected representatives (politicians) govern the country; people look upon the judiciary as the necessary option for people having disputes to seek remedy, as the credibility of the politicians often have become suspect in the eyes of the public.
There cannot be a scenario without judiciary in any country. Absence of judiciary is unimaginable, as otherwise disputes have to be settled between individuals or groups only by resorting to force and violence. In other words, existence of judiciary is viewed as a pre condition to ensure an orderly society.
When individuals or groups approach judiciary with disputes and seek judgement, it is inevitable that one party would get favourable judgement and another party would get unfavourable judgement. Inevitably, the party getting a favourable judgement would hail the judge for the objective approach and capability to judge the matter, while those not getting favourable judgement would think that the judge has been unfair or the judge has erred. Certainly, the positions of the judges are unenviable, as they cannot please all.
In all democratic countries, there is rule of law and provisions in the constitution and the judges are supposed to deliver judgements keeping the rule of law and constitution in view. But, in practical circumstances, this is always not possible and judges have to view the matter concerning the disputes in a holistic manner, with an analytical and judicious mindset.
When viewing the matter in a holistic manner and keeping the ground realities in view and ensuring fairness in the view of the judge, it is inevitable that the perspectives and personal views and prejudices of the judges would come into play.
This is the reason why judges often differ between themselves, while judging the same dispute matter. Often, we see situations where a higher court overrules a lower court and three or five judges sitting in a bench give different views and different judgements in the same case. Which judge is right and which judge is wrong?

Misgivings

In such circumstances, several judgements of the courts are viewed with misgivings by one section of people or the other.
Such perspectives may be there among people, since many think that the selection process for judges are not transparent and fool proof. Further, there is also a view that all judges may not be incorruptible, which is often proved by the fact that some judges have been caught on corruption charges.
The net result of the scenario is that it has become extremely difficult to anticipate the judgement by judges and as to which side the judgement would go. In some cases, the judgements of the courts have caused considerable shock and surprise amongst people.
In US courts, there are number of cases now being heard about the dealings of former US President Donald Trump, who is now trying to seeking re-election as the next President of USA. The judgements in different courts on the cases relating to Donald Trump have gone in different ways, with people getting confused as to which judgement is appropriate and which is not.

Why are British judges taking so long time to repatriate those who have run way from India on facing possible arrest?

In British courts, number of cases are being heard about the activities of a few Indians who have gone to Britain, after running away from India, as they have faced the possibility of arrest by the Indian government due to their unlawful activities such as tax evasion, loan default, money laundering.

The Indian government wants them to be repatriated but the British courts are giving a long rope to these persons, with their cases being prolonged for a very long time. Many people in India wonder why British judges should take such long time and allow such protracted hearings, when it is “open and shut case”.
In India, the chief minister of a state was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate for enquiring into what the enforcement authority term as criminal activities. The Supreme Court released the chief minister on bail, since the court said that he cannot be denied the right for campaigning during the ongoing parliamentary election in the country. This is so, particularly in a situation where another court has opined that there is prima facie criminal case against the chief minister.
The Enforcement Directorate argued that the bail should not be given to a person facing criminal charges for campaigning in the election, as this would set a very bad precedent. According to the Enforcement Directorate, granting bail would open Pandora's box, as several other politicians facing criminal charges would seek bail for themselves, claiming that they too need to do election campaigning.

However, the learned judges thought it fit to release the chief minister facing criminal charges by providing bail till the completion of the election date.
In any case, there is no alternative other than seeking court judgements to settle disputes. While one would agree with the judgement or not, the judgements have to be accepted at the face value. This is the ground reality.
---
*Trustee, Nandini Voice For The Deprived, Chennai

Comments

Gram sabha as reformer: Mandla’s quiet challenge to the liquor economy

By Raj Kumar Sinha* This year, the Union Ministry of Panchayati Raj is organising a two-day PESA Mahotsav in Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh, on 23–24 December 2025. The event marks the passage of the Panchayats (Extension to Scheduled Areas) Act, 1996 (PESA), enacted by Parliament on 24 December 1996 to establish self-governance in Fifth Schedule areas. Scheduled Areas are those notified by the President of India under Article 244(1) read with the Fifth Schedule of the Constitution, which provides for a distinct framework of governance recognising the autonomy of tribal regions. At present, Fifth Schedule areas exist in ten states: Andhra Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Gujarat, Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Rajasthan and Telangana. The PESA Act, 1996 empowers Gram Sabhas—the village assemblies—as the foundation of self-rule in these areas. Among the many powers devolved to them is the authority to take decisions on local matters, including the regulation...

MG-NREGA: A global model still waiting to be fully implemented

By Bharat Dogra When the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MG-NREGA) was introduced in India nearly two decades ago, it drew worldwide attention. The reason was evident. At a time when states across much of the world were retreating from responsibility for livelihoods and welfare, the world’s second most populous country—with nearly two-thirds of its people living in rural or semi-rural areas—committed itself to guaranteeing 100 days of employment a year to its rural population.

Policy changes in rural employment scheme and the politics of nomenclature

By N.S. Venkataraman* The Government of India has introduced a revised rural employment programme by fine-tuning the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), which has been in operation for nearly two decades. The MGNREGA scheme guarantees 100 days of employment annually to rural households and has primarily benefited populations in rural areas. The revised programme has been named VB-G RAM–G (Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission – Gramin). The government has stated that the revised scheme incorporates several structural changes, including an increase in guaranteed employment from 100 to 125 days, modifications in the financing pattern, provisions to strengthen unemployment allowances, and penalties for delays in wage payments. Given the extent of these changes, the government has argued that a new name is required to distinguish the revised programme from the existing MGNREGA framework. As has been witnessed in recent years, the introdu...

A comrade in culture and controversy: Yao Wenyuan’s revolutionary legacy

By Harsh Thakor* This year marks two important anniversaries in Chinese revolutionary history—the 20th death anniversary of Yao Wenyuan, and the 50th anniversary of his seminal essay "On the Social Basis of the Lin Biao Anti-Party Clique". These milestones invite reflection on the man whose pen ignited the first sparks of the Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution and whose sharp ideological interventions left an indelible imprint on the political and cultural landscape of socialist China.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Concerns raised over move to rename MGNREGA, critics call it politically motivated

By A Representative Concerns have been raised over the Union government’s reported move to rename the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), with critics describing it as a politically motivated step rather than an administrative reform. They argue that the proposed change undermines the legacy of Mahatma Gandhi and seeks to appropriate credit for a programme whose relevance has been repeatedly demonstrated, particularly during times of crisis.

Rollback of right to work? VB–GRAM G Bill 'dilutes' statutory employment guarantee

By A Representative The Right to Food Campaign has strongly condemned the passage of the Viksit Bharat – Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) (VB–GRAM G) Bill, 2025, describing it as a major rollback of workers’ rights and a fundamental dilution of the statutory Right to Work guaranteed under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA). In a statement, the Campaign termed the repeal of MGNREGA a “dark day for workers’ rights” and accused the government of converting a legally enforceable, demand-based employment guarantee into a centralised, discretionary welfare scheme.

Making rigid distinctions between Indian and foreign 'historically untenable'

By A Representative Oral historian, filmmaker and cultural conservationist Sohail Hashmi has said that everyday practices related to attire, food and architecture in India reflect long histories of interaction and adaptation rather than rigid or exclusionary ideas of identity. He was speaking at a webinar organised by the Indian History Forum (IHF).

India’s Halal economy 'faces an uncertain future' under the new food Bill

By Syed Ali Mujtaba* The proposed Food Safety and Standards (Amendment) Bill, 2025 marks a decisive shift in India’s food regulation landscape by seeking to place Halal certification exclusively under government control while criminalising all private Halal certification bodies. Although the Bill claims to promote “transparency” and “standardisation,” its structure and implications raise serious concerns about religious freedom, economic marginalisation, and the systematic dismantling of a long-established, Muslim-led Halal ecosystem in India.

Search This Blog