Between Voices: A Linguistic Study of Scaroa v. Union of India

This paper engages in an exploration of the intersection between law and literature through the analysis of a seminal legal text: the Supreme Court Advocates-on-record Association & Anr—vs. Union of India 2015 case. Drawing on the theories of interpreting language, particularly Mikhail Bakhtin's concept of heteroglossia, alongside related theories from the field of literary studies, delving into the multifaceted nature of legal discourse. The case, which revolves around the issue of judicial appointments in India, provides a rich tapestry of language that goes beyond mere legal argumentation. Through a lens informed by Bakhtinian thought and other similar theories, this study aims to uncover the layers of meaning, the interplay of voices, and the dialogical nature inherent in legal texts. Through an interdisciplinary approach that melds law and literary theory, this project seeks to shed light on how legal language is not a static entity but a living, breathing dialogue between various perspectives, as has been stated by the Living Tree Doctrine. The doctrine famously articulated in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) & Anr. vs. Union of India & Ors. (2017), posits, that a constitution is a living document that evolves with society, which allows for a more dynamic and progressive interpretation of constitutional provisions, ensuring that they remain relevant and effective in changing times. By examining the nuances of language, this analysis aims to contribute to a deeper understanding of the role of language in legal decision-making processes.