In Ashwani Kumar v. Union of India, WP (C) No. 193 of 2016, J. Lokur directed the Government to ensure that elderly people’s rights under Article 21 are properly enforced. In his opening statement, Justice Lokur reiterated his position in these terms: “Social justice in the Preamble of our Constitution has been given pride of place and for good reason since it is perhaps the most important and significant form of justice.”
In another judgment Inhuman Conditions in 1382 Prisons, In re, IA No. 26452 of 2018 in WP (C) No. 406 of 2013, Justice Lokur considering the issue of condition of death convicts from a “humanitarian and compassionate” perspective, stated that “a prisoner is entitled to every creature comfort and facilities such as bed and pillow, opportunity to commerce with humankind, writing material, newspapers, books, meeting with family members etc.”
in Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik v. State of Maharashtra, Review Petition (Crl.) No. 306 of 2013 where while delivering the judgment for the Court, Justice Lokur laid stress on reformative theory and opined, “probability (not possibility or improbability or impossibility) that a convict can be reformed and rehabilitated in society must be seriously and earnestly considered by the courts before awarding the death sentence.”
in Nipun Saxena v. Union of India,2018 SCC OnLine SC 2772, where Justice Lokur was on the Bench with Deepak Gupta, J., the Court extensively considered the problem of social ostracisation and harassment of victims of rape and sexual offences and noted that “Any litigant who enters the court feels intimidated by the atmosphere of the court. Children and women, especially those who have been subjected to sexual assault are virtually overwhelmed by the atmosphere in the courts. They are scared. They are so nervous that they, sometimes, are not even able to describe the nature of the crime accurately. When they are cross-examined in a hostile and intimidatory manner then the nervousness increases and the truth does not come out.” This in Court’s opinion makes it imperative that we should have courts which are child-friendly and trials which are victim friendly.
One may also remember that the same Bench in October last year held in Independent Thought v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 800 that sexual intercourse with a minor wife is rape. Justice Lokur in his judgment stated, “It must be remembered that those days are long gone when a married woman or a married girl child could be treated as subordinate to her husband or at his beck and call or as his property. Constitutionally a female has equal rights as a male and no statute should be interpreted or understood to derogate from this position. If there is some theory that propounds such an unconstitutional myth, then that theory deserves to be completely demolished
LawUmbrella 