The Indian judiciary kept functioning and fulfilling its role in a democracy in the backdrop of the coronavirus pandemic. The Supreme Court of India went virtual after the nationwide lockdown was announced in March earlier this year.
Even though the pandemic changed the way courts functioned in the country, the Supreme Court of India adjudicated on various important cases and delivered certain important judgements in the last year.
Even though the year is coming to an end, these judgements will have a long-lasting impact on society, politics, and other cases that will come before the Supreme Court benches in the future.
Here’s looking back on some of these judgements.
SC upholds daughter’s right to property in Hindu undivided family: In what expanded the scope of women’s rights especially when it comes to ancestral property, the Supreme Court in a significant decision put forth that the daughters have an equal right as that of sons to father’s property. The SC clarified that fathers need not have been alive at the time when an amendment was passed to the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
SC directs permanent women commission in armed forces: In another judgement on gender parity, the Supreme Court directed the Indian government to give permanent commission in the armed forces to all the women officers who completed 14 years of service. It also directed the government to give pensionary benefits to the women who were retired when not granted the commission.
SC quashes restriction on cryptocurrency: In another important ruling, the Supreme Court quashed the Reserve Bank of India restriction on cryptocurrency and the use of bitcoins from 2018. It allowed many to invest in the emerging market of cryptocurrency.
SC says reservation is not a fundamental right: The Supreme Court, in its wisdom, judged that no court could ask any state government to provide reservation. The SC said that the constitutional mandate of reservation was on the discretion of a state government to offer.
SC extends protection under anticipatory bail: In a significant ruling, a Supreme Court bench of five judges ruled that the validity of an anticipatory bail continues till the trial comes to an end and need not end when the defendant comes to the court.