Yes, it may sometimes seem that he was given to verbal excess. But, in the ultimate analysis, one feels an abundance of humanism made him speak and write the way he did. Who else, but V.R. Krishna Iyer could have written judgments that read like this: The compulsion of constitutional humanism and the assumption of full faith in life and liberty cannot be, so futile or fragmentary that any transient legislative majority in tantrums against any minority, by three quick readings of a bill with the requisite quorum; can prescribe any unreasonable modality and thereby sterilise the grandiloquent mandate. Procedure established by law, with its lethal potentiality, will reduce life and liberty to a precarious plaything if we do not ex necessitate import into those weighty words an, adjectival rule of law, civilised in its soul, fair in its heart and fixing those imperatives of procedural protection absent which the processual tail will wag the substantive head. Can the sacred essence of the human right to secure which the struggle for liberation, with do or die patriotism, was launched be sapped by formalistic and pharisaic prescriptions, regardless of essential standards ? An enacted apperition is a constitutional illusion. Processual justice is writ patently on Art. 21. It is too grave to be circumvented by a black letter ritual processed through the legislature. A great judicial mind departs.
Posted on: Thu, 04 Dec 2014 11:30:48 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015