We want LI to be one of the friendliest places on the internet, where lawyers and law students help each other with their career related queries and occasionally discuss other stuff that might affect their lives too. In other words:
1. Be kind, respectful and helpful to each other.
2. Be bona fide, truthful, genuine and curious.
3. Assume the best intention of others.
Therefore, in using the site, you must agree to do your best to uphold these community guidelines.
Note that what you find here is written and moderated by anonymous people on the internet.
Therefore everything you read here is very likely unverified, rumour, speculation and/or downright false.
In continuing to read anything here, you must therefore agree not to take anything you read here as factual and that you will exercise due caution, diligence and common sense before acting on any information you may come across here.
You also agree to report any inaccurate or malicious comments with the buttons. Moderators take action within 24 hours, as required and appropriate under law.
Our full terms and conditions apply too.
Do you solemnly agree to all of the above?
I had no idea such a case was being heard and TOI is the only major newspaper to cover it. It’s obviously a huge case because of its ramifications on the country, but it also coincides with the issue of redistribution of wealth taking centre stage in the elections. On the one hand, Modi has claimed that money seized from scams in Bengal will be redistributed to the people of Bengal. On the other hand, Rahul Gandhi has spoken of deeper structural inequality and redistribution of private wealth. Priyanka Gandhi clarified yesterday that this is linked to the caste census and wealth will be redistributed from privileged castes to deprived castes. The SC ruling will have a direct bearing on such claims.
Meanwhile, the Counsel (Zal Andhyarujina) is trying to turn this into a culture war by dragging in Marxist ideology. This argument will spectacularly fail because Marxism is inherently about democracy and strengthens democracy! It is capitalism that is anti-democratic. Very unfortunate that such an eminent counsel is making such foolish arguments.
https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/why-scs-nine-judge-bench-needs-to-interpret-article-39b/amp_articleshow/109542453.cms