by IJLMH | Jul 1, 2020
Battered Woman Syndrome (BWS) is a pattern of psychological and behavioural symptoms found in women who have been living in an abusive relationship for a very long time. It is a sub category of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and is manifested in the form of depression, anxiety problems, low self-esteem and often put women at risk of suicide or homicide. Instead of terminating this unhealthy relationship with their abuser, these women kill their abuser to end the chain of domestic violence. The reason why she suffers the physical and psychological violence caused by their abuser for a very long time before killing them is because she develops a ‘learned helplessness’ which makes her submissive, and she accepts the battering as a part of her life. Women lack the physical strength to fight their abusers. So when the violence is at its peak, these women kill their batterers in non-confrontational circumstances but the courts still convict them as murderers.
This article analyses failure of Indian Courts to acknowledge the fact that psychological traits of women and men in cases like these are different and that women shall not be required to fit their psychological traits within the ones pertinent to men. The courts should not judge these women’s actions based on male experience.
Moreover, this article will also highlight that as a feminist model of jurisprudence Battered Woman Syndrome needs to seek judicial recognition in India and needs to be incorporated within the Indian Criminal Framework as a defense for the helpless women. Lastly, the article will conclude by suggesting the ways to integrate BWS under the provisions of Provocation, Private Defense and Insanity as mentioned in the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
by IJLMH | Jul 1, 2020
The legal framework of many countries of the world contains a composed constitution which ensures key rights against the abundances and the detachment of the lawmaking body and the official. Such constitution after perceive the ‘demonstration to life’, equivalent security of law and ‘fair treatment of law’. They preclude ‘remorseless and unordinary discipline and debasing treatment or discipline’. The sacred legitimacy of the death penalty is an issue which has pained the sacred courts of the world. It is an inquiry the response to which gives a litmus test of the soul in which a preeminent court plays out its obligations. The cases where the lawfulness of the passing punishment has been condemned raise for judicial survey a state practice of questionable good appropriateness one impinging on the basic right to life of the most vulnerable individuals from society an issue wherein the guidelines of liberals are in struggle with the gauges of preservationists and regularly with those of the man in the road.
Historically, India has never seen any development for the abrogation of capital punishment. In any case, it doesn’t imply that no endeavor has been made for its annulment. The protected legitimacy of capital punishment has been tested in a number of cases and this has been done on various grounds. The discussion of death sentence accepted new criticalness presented by the Indian Supreme Court in the translation of Article 21 read with Article 14 and 19 . The age making and point of reference breaking choice of Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India set out the tenet of sensible technique for the hardship, of life and individual freedom. The Supreme Court held that the technique for the determination of life and individual freedom must be reasonable, just and sensible and not whimsical, harsh or self-assertive.
by IJLMH | Jul 1, 2020
Over the past few years, the role of the Judiciary has been quite significant in the development of society and in shaping how the members of society are treated. Judiciary has always aimed at doing the best possible justice to whosoever knocked on its door. Till today, the judiciary has delivered judgments in huge numbers. Society has always celebrated some of the great decisions pronounced by the hon’ble courts. Nevertheless, there always exist some implicit factors which decrease the competency of the judicial system. This article analyses the loopholes in the judicial process. This piece of work throws light on the judicial process that creates an illusion in the minds of the billions that justice is served when in reality, there are thousands of stories of injustice hidden behind the few stories of the triumph of justice.
by IJLMH | Jul 1, 2020
The judicial system plays the most pivotal role in Indian democracy, the role to interpret the law framed by the legislature which is later sent to the executive. It resolves and adjudicates the disputes between center and state or, group of states against a state, or state and state, or, state and an individual, or between two individuals. And for this reason it is called Saviour of Democracy. The three organs of the government ensure efficiency and effectiveness and any instability among them can directly hamper the administrative progress. And to regulate the mutual coordination among the three pillars for smooth functioning, the judiciary acts as a catalyst to protect the rights of the individuals and state from chaos and exploitation. It also protects the rights and law of the land and this act is known as Judicial Activism. The Judicial system in India has touched every aspect of human life in India and has always proven to be affirmative by becoming a boon for the poor and weaker section of the society, by protecting their individual rights. It is very difficult to trace the inception of Judicial Activism in India as it was recognized and identified as a separate organ of the Government. The dissenting judgment of the Justice Mahmud sowed the seed of judicial activism in the soil of India. This paper illustrates the evolution, concept and reason for growth of Judicial Activism in India. This paper aims to instill a deep understanding on the evolving dimensions of Pre and Post emergency Judicial Activism through the help of case laws and a glance on Indian perspective on Judicial Activism.
Keywords: Judicial Activism, Constitution, Judiciary, PIL.
by IJLMH | Jul 1, 2020
This study provides large sample evidence on the effects of anti-takeover provisions (ATPs) on the firms’, takeover probability and premium in various takeover contests. No company wants to be taken over without proper and adequate warning that too before hand. Anti takeover provisions are adopted to prevent a hostile takeover and is a serious problem that needs to be addressed. From the perspective of a financial theory, the main issue is to see whether the benefits from acquisitions are greater than the costs including the initial investment. And also whether the marginal returns on investment post acquisition is greater than the marginal cost. We also showcase various ATPs that managers choose to strengthen their firm when faced with an increased threat of takeovers, and the effectiveness of these ATPs in deterring and reducing takeover attempts. Finally, we add to the growing context on the changes in various governing policies and outcomes in states or organizations that adopt such anti takeover provisions. Therefore its important to have a legislation like IDD in the Indian jurisprudence to help companies from being taken over.
by IJLMH | Jul 1, 2020
The chief intrinsic of the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019 is to provide citizenship status to the Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Christians, Parsis and Jains who have absconded from the neighboring countries such as Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan into the Indian Territory before 31st December 2019 as a result of religious persecution but excludes Muslim refugees from the above mentioned countries. As the Citizenship Amendment act does not treat the Muslims equally with their counterparts Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Christians, Parsis and Jains under the equal circumstance of religious persecution and segregation of the Muslims from the same is irrational and absurd because the taxonomy fashioned by the Citizenship Amendment Act exclusively on religion is perverse and hence the differentia formed by the Act is one which is not based on a reasonable nexus thereby violating Article 14. When the recipient of the law is pedestal on religious hounding then parting out Muslims who are religiously victimized entails that they would be kept back in incarceration centers in contrast to their Hindu, Muslim, Buddhists, Sikhs and Jains from the aforesaid countries consequently constricting their right to life and personal liberty on the basis of an unfair procedure and violating Article 21. Furthermore as the Act discriminates the Muslim refugees in relation to granting them citizenship rights solely on the basis of their religion it casts an attack on the well cherished principle of secularism and thereby contravenes the basic structure and the principle of constitutional morality enshrined under the Constitution. In acquiesce to the Citizenship Amendment Act the cutoff date for persons pertaining to the six abovementioned religious groups asserting citizenship in India is 31st December 2014 which collides with the NRC cutoff date of 24th March 1971 consequently rendering the gross calisthenics of NRC in Assam futile.
