Justice S.

Muralidhar
Landmark Judgements
Naz Foundation v. Government of NCT Of Delhi (2 July 2009): Justice Muralidhar was part of the two-
judge bench, headed by then chief justice of Delhi HC, that delivered the landmark  verdict which
said that Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code shall not cover same-sex consensual relationships
between adults. It was the very foundation of equal legal rights for the LGBTQI community in India.

Laxmi Mandal v. Deen Dayal Harinagar Hospital and Others (4 June 2010): While delivering the
judgment, Justice Muralidhar emphasized that the Indian Government is obligated to ensure
maternal health services under the judicially- recognized constitutional rights to health and
reproductive rights. Drawing on international law Justice Muralidhar underlined that women have
the right to control their bodies and decide when they wish to conceive. The Court also pointed out
that women carry the burden of poverty in that they have to prove their BPL status when trying to
access health facilities and accordingly ordered that “No pregnant women be denied access to
medical treatment regardless of her social-economical status”.

Mirchpur killings case (24 August 2018): The Bench comprising Justice S. Muralidhar and Justice I.S.
Mehta said that, “71 years after Independence, instances of atrocities against Scheduled Castes by
those belonging to dominant castes have shown no sign of abating. The incidents that took place in
Mirchpur between 19th and 21st April 2010 serve as yet another grim reminder of “the complete
absence of two things in Indian society” as noted by Dr. B.R. Ambedkar when he tabled the final
draft of the Constitution of India before the Constituent Assembly on 25th November 1949. One was
‘equality’ and the other, 'fraternity’.”

Ajay Maken and Ors. v. UoI (18 March, 2019): The court said before carrying out an eviction drive,
the authorities will have to conduct detailed survey, draw up a rehabilitation plan in consultation
with the dwellers in the JJ bastis and jhuggis and ensure that after eviction they are immediately
rehabilitated. "Forced eviction of jhuggi dwellers, unannounced, in co-ordination with the other
agencies, and without compliance with the above steps, would be contrary to the law...," a bench of
justices S Muralidhar and Vibhu Bhakru said. The bench observed that "the right to housing is a
bundle of rights not limited to a bare shelter over one's head. It includes the right to livelihood, right
to health, right to education and right to food, including right to clean drinking water, sewerage and
transport facilities."

Notable Books/Essays
The Expectations and Challenges of Judicial Enforcement of Social Rights (essay): The increasing
instances of the State withdrawing from its welfare role and resorting to privatization of the control
and distribution of basic community resources like water and electricity and for providing health
care and education are a cause for concern for those wishing to assert the obligation of the State in
the spheres of economic and social rights. The withdrawal of the State in these areas results in a
prominent role for the corporate sector in the control of common resources of the community.
While on the one hand this transition requires to be contested on the political and judicial fronts,
there is a need for the law to clearly demarcate the liability of the corporate sector for the violation
of economic and social rights.
(https://delhidistrictcourts.nic.in/ejournals/Social_Rights_Jurisprudence.pdf)X
Law, Poverty and Legal Aid: Access to Criminal Justice (book): This book focuses on the importance of
the right of access to justice for those interacting with the criminal justice system. It traces the
historical evolution of criminal legal aid in the country, analyses the relevant statutes, schemes and
judicial pronouncements and seeks to demonstrate the linkage that the denial of legal aid has with
the loss of liberty of an individual within the criminal justice system. Situating the issue in the
context of law and poverty, this work shows that for the economically and socially disadvantaged
person, the denial of access to justice, which is a non-derogable right, could result in multiple
violations of human rights including the deprivation of the means of survival and have the effect of
delegitimising the legal system in relation to such person.

Access to Justice (essay)

(https://www.india-seminar.com/2005/545/545%20s.%20muralidhar1.htm)X

Other Interests (Speeches, initiatives, etc.)

Speech on ‘Evolution of Legal Aid Movement in India’ (2017): Dr Muralidhar paralleled the social
with the political, and asserted that law as an instrument of change can bring in some measure of
equality into the social and economic sphere. In this perspective, he viewed as legal aid to the poor
as an effective instrument to sufficient utilization of political equality. Then he went on to explain the
ideal multi-layered structure of an effective legal aid model and noted the different phases at which
an effective legal aid mechanism ought to intervene. Justice Muralidhar then identified the barriers
to effective inclusion of poor into the legal fold by drawing attention to discriminatory laws, such as
those which criminalize poverty, the systemic problem of the mystification of law and legal
processes, and the privileging of sections of society including the high dependence on lawyers by
poor illiterate litigants. It was noted that the costs involved in the legal process, delays and
uncertainties embedded in the institutional model of state-sponsored legal aid; coupled with further
special disadvantages such as poverty, social status, economic status, gender, age, sexual
orientation, etc; pose serious problems. He also remarked as to how our failure to integrate the
nonformal legal systems with the formal legal system has had an adverse impact on the socially
disadvantaged sections of the society, despite some of them having proved more effective than the
formal legal system itself. (http://images.assettype.com/barandbench/import/2017/02/PRESS-
RELEASE-Justice-Muralidhar.pdf)X

Crime, Punishment and Justice in India: The Trajectories of Criminal Law in India (2018): Preventive
detention statutes- Colonial model. No question of legal aid arises as it is executive action. Majority
of those incarcerated whether as undertrials or convicts belong to Scheduled Castes, Scheduled
Tribes or minorities. Emphasizes the disproportionate impact our criminal justice system has on the
disadvantaged and minorities. Talks about UAPA, NDPS Act etc. Conviction rates under TADA and
POTA abysmally low. These are not effective means to control crimes as claimed. Example of rape
laws 2013- Concludes that stricter laws are not a deterrent. Examines how class differences drive
criminality. Rehabilitation as a goal of controlling criminality. (https://www.project39a.com/annual-
lecture)X

Farewell speech in Delhi HC (5 March 2020): “The Constitution, in my view, requires the judge at all
levels to be able to discern the weak from the strong litigant in terms of their capacities to access
justice and lean on the side of the vulnerable in order to attempt to achieve equality of arms.”
Justice Gita Mittal
Landmark Judgements
Delhi High Court Bar Association vs. Government of NCT of Delhi (2013): Court Fees (Delhi
Amendment) Act of 2012 adversely impacts fundamental rights and results in violation of Article 38
and 39A of the Constitution of India on various counts, such as reducing women’s access to court.

 Sajid Ali vs State & Others (3 May 2013): Justice Gita Mittal ruled that a Delhi high court rule
prohibiting the entry of litigants who did not show an identity card was unconstitutional. She said
that one cannot make “courts inaccessible to the disadvantaged who are less likely to have
government-issued documents of identification.” “Access to justice to all has to be the heartbeat of
every judge and the `mantra’ of every court’s administration.”

12 September 2017: A division bench of Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C. Hari Shankar
said there should be a protocol or a scheme in place so that the Delhi State Legal Service Authority
(DSLSA) is immediately alerted by the police if a crime involving sexual violence takes place
anywhere in the capital. This was crucial to ensure that “necessary legal aid is provided to the
victims at the very inception from the time the offence is revealed and remains available to the
victim at every stage”.

8 August 2018: A bench comprising acting chief justice Gita Mittal and justice C Hari Shankar struck
down the provisions of the Bombay Prevention of Begging Act, 1959, as unconstitutional, except
those parts which criminalise “forced” begging.

Syed Tassadque Hussain v. UoI (16 October 2019): A division bench of Chief Justice Gita Mittal and
Justice Rashid Ali Dar directed the government to ensure that legal assistance is made available to all
the detenus under the Public Safety Act.
(http://images.assettype.com/barandbench/import/2019/10/Jammu-and-Kashmir-HC-Public-Safety-
Act-Legal-Represenation-Order-October-16-2019.pdf)X

Suhail Rashid Bhat v State of Jammu and Kashmir (25 October 2019): Jammu & Kashmir Prevention
of Beggary Act, 1960 was struck down. Along with Justice Rajesh Bindal, she held that it
was “unconstitutional” and “disproportionate infringement of the right to meaningful life, dignity,
privacy and liberty guaranteed under Article 21”. “The criminalisation of begging, which makes
poverty an offence, is intended to remove poor people from public spaces, deprive them of the
constitutional guarantees of inclusiveness and pluralism, and results in their further deprivation,”
the court said. Terming begging as a human rights issue, the court asserted that “begging manifests
failure of the state to ensure basic entitlements of health, food, clothing, shelter”.

16 April 2020:  The Jammu and Kashmir High Court called for a report on the steps taken to act
against domestic violence or any other kind of violence being faced by women during the COVID-19
lockdown. This sou moto order was directed to the Department of Social Welfare and the Legal
Services Authority.  The order stated: “Unfortunately, all crises disproportionately impact women.
Thus internationally, it has been observed that while the pandemic is having a tremendous negative
impact on societies and economies, the adverse social and economic consequences of the pandemic
for women and girls are devastating.”
Other Interests (Speeches, initiatives, etc.)
 Vulnerable Witness Courtroom Project: to provide an intimidation-free and friendly
atmosphere to minor victims of sexual offences to depose. (2012)

 Rape and gender-based violence are tools used to subjugate women and are directly related
to equality, dignity and status of women, Justice Gita Mittal said. She called for effective
ways, including reforms in laws, to address such crimes. (2013)

 Access to justice is not synonymous with access to a court, the Delhi High Court's Acting
Chief Justice Gita Mittal said. Maintaining that there were several barriers to be overcome,
she said these included "empowering and mainstreaming of disability and diversity,
dispensing information and knowledge about the court systems and law as well as
facilitating physical and mental access". She made the comments while launching a helpline
to dispense information to litigants. (2017)

 In a path-breaking initiative, the Delhi High Court has injected a fresh dimension to “justice”
by providing employment to five victims of acid attacks and a transgender. Though they had
earlier secured legal redress society continued to shun them, and earning a living was
difficult. When their plight was conveyed to Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal by the Delhi State
Legal Services Authority, she added a humane element to the often cold statute book,
personally met the under-privileged persons, interviewed them, and after evaluating their
abilities offered them clerical jobs on a contractual basis. (2017)

 Conceived the idea of preparing a module on sexual violence for school children of ages 14-
18 in order to increase their legal awareness on the matter. A programme on ‘Child Abuse
and Violence- Interpersonal and Digital World’ was held at Air Force Bal Bharti School, New
Delhi in collaboration with DSLSA. (2018)

 Justice Gita Mittal expressed feminist judging to her was about women’s access to justice.
She spoke about the limitations women face irrespective of their backgrounds while seeking
legal redress. She stated that some of the major barriers that a woman faces are her family
and friends who dissuade her from reaching out for help, financial barriers, . She expressed
that access to justice is not synonymous to access to courts. (2018)