Document Type
Article
Publication Title
Indian Law Review
Publication Date
2-2021
ISSN
0042-2533
Page Number
382
Keywords
Supreme Court of India, constitutional law, tortfeasor
Disciplines
Constitutional Law | Law | Law and Gender
Abstract
In this contribution, as part of the Indian Feminist Judgement Project, we reconsider the decision of the Supreme Court of India in the Charan Lal Sahu case that followed the Bhopal gas leak tragedy. We present a dissenting opinion on the case, finding that the law empowering the State to supplant the victim-survivors as plaintiffs was unconstitutional. Alongside, we offer a brief commentary on why this finding comports with what a feminist judge on the bench might have decided. We consider a variety of ways in which feminist criticism of the majority decision might proceed, and how this criticism informs our rewriting. We also consider a set of persistent questions about feminist judging, and ways in which our rewriting, in turn, might be subject to further feminist objections
Recommended Citation
Sannoy Wright Das and Ananyaa Alexander Mazumdar,
The State and the Patriarch: Rewriting Charan Lal Sahu, Rakesh Shrouti, Rajkumar Keswani, Nasrin Bi and Others v. Union of India (1990) 1 SCC 613, 5 Indian Law Review. 382
(2021)
Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/faculty-publications/1636