On Dec 14, 2013, at 5:45 PM, "roland.francis" <roland.fran...@ymail.com> wrote:
"It's a pity that the Supreme Court has passed a ruling that is extremely regressive putting the onus on Parliament to change the law." Dear Roland, I do not know what you mean by the [hrase "extremely regressive". The Supreme Court is absolutely right in respecting the Separation of Powers. For, while, the court can Interpret a law, It CANNOT rule in contravention of existing law. It is up to Parliament (the Legislative branch) to amend or repeal the statute in question. A similar situation arose in Britain where until 2002, land (property) could be swiped by squatters via a well abused principle known as Adverse Possession. The House of Lords (the final Court in the case) in JA Pye v Graham (Oxford) Ltd v Graham [2002] UKHL 30 had NO choice but to award prime land to the tramp who was squatting on it. A few months later, British Parliament enacted the Land Registration Act 2002 which makes it difficult for Registered Land to be swiped in the UK Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code bans homosexual and acts which constitute bestiality. The statute may be archaic and from the colonial era but it is valid until it is repealed or amended. No point frothing at the Supreme Court for doing its job and even effectively advising (like the UK judges did in 2002) Parliament to do its job Please note: While there is lip service and feigned shock and disappointment among politicians, I will be surprised IF the present dispensation brings up the amendment for a legislative vote...unless the political calculator advises them to do so. As it is, the BJP is likely to oppose such an amendment. jc ps: Think of how much property has been swiped in Goa?