The Midas Bench: Justice Abhay Oka’s Legacy of Law, Liberty, and Constitutionalism
By Prof Upendra Baxi
On Might 24, 2025, Justice Abhay S Oka retired from the Supreme Courtroom after near 4 years on the bench and 383 judgments and served on 594 benches, testifying to laborious juristic labour of artistic interpretation of regulation and the Structure. Most of Justice Oka’s (40 %) judgments relate to felony circumstances, whereas 14 % of judgments relate to Civil issues aside from service (10 %) and property (8 %) issues. However these percentiles derived from the Supreme Courtroom Observer is probably not wholly persuasive as a result of Justice Oka administered a “Midas contact” (changing base steel into gold) of a 75-year-plus constitutionalism to virtually each sphere of regulation and litigation. It’s troublesome to analyse Justice Oka’s contribution to the continuously evolving jurisprudence of Indian Structure@75; this text solely addresses some salient points of his normative labours.
FEARLESS INTEGRITY AND HARD WORK
Maybe, in at present’s world the place social media posts result in the persecution, and even prosecution, on the grounds of the jurisprudence of damage emotions, Justice Oka’s resolution (with Justice Ujjal Bhuyan) in Javeed Ahmad Hajam, is clear when police motion on “damage sentiments” has develop into rampant.
The petitioner was a professor at Sanjay Ghodavat Faculty and a member of a dad and mom and academics WhatsApp group. He posted (between August 13, 2022, and August 15, 2022), two messages: 1. “August 5 – Black Day Jammu & Kashmir and “14th August – Comfortable Independence Day Pakistan. Moreover, was included on their cell with the message: “Article 370 was abrogated, we aren’t pleased.”
Justice Oka described the day of the abrogation a “Black Day” an “expression of protest and anguish” and as respectable feedback and criticisms. He noticed: “If each criticism or protest of the actions of the state is to be held as an offence below Part 153-A, democracy, which is an important characteristic of the Structure of India, won’t survive”. Additional, “alternative to peacefully protest in opposition to the selections of the government is an important a part of democracy”. Not totally resting there, he added: “Now, the time has come to enlighten and educate our police equipment on the idea of freedom of speech and expression assured by Article 19(1)(a) of the Structure and the extent of cheap restraint on their free speech and expression. They should be sensitised concerning the democratic values enshrined in our Structure”.
Should this stay a dialogue of the hearing-impaired or the nationwide and regional police academies and their state cohorts will quickly act on the matter? I needn’t elaborate on the importance of their Lordship’s resolution; it’s writ massive in its date of supply: March 7, 2024 (the loss of life anniversary of Govind Ballabh Pant, one of many architects of recent India and its illustrious Union residence minister for a very long time).
THE CONSTITUTIONAL PEDAGOGY OF NOISE POLLUTION
The legendary contribution of Justice Oka will lengthy be remembered by grateful Indian residents, and “scholactivists”, a lot past the shores of Maharashtra. The prelude to Mahesh Vijay Badekar case (2017) is of curiosity. As reported within the native media, Justice Oka was introduced again after three days by Chief Justice Manjula Chellar, regardless of critical allegations of bias levelled by the state. So swift was the anguished response by the Bombay Bar, and others, that the case was restored to Justice Oka who proceeded to listen to substantial submissions on deserves of the case. The discovered Justice determined many a matter, however the major holding was to totally implement the provisions of the Noise Air pollution Act, in direction of implementation the state gave the impression to be scandalously detached.
Notable stays the insistence that any scenario seeming battle of basic rights should be resolved, as an integral side of the judicial responsibility, and a constitutional decision of the matter should be scrupulously devised. Considerably, Justice Oka doesn’t depend on the fatigued doctrine of “cheap classification” or the extra newly fangled notions of proportionality. Quite, interesting is the Supreme Courtroom’s ruling that “noise can disturb our relaxation, sleep and communication. It will probably injury our listening to and evoke different gynaecological and pathological reactions.
The apex court docket has thought of the unwell results of noise air pollution. Analysis has proved {that a} loud noise throughout peak advertising and marketing hours creates tiredness, irritation and impairs mind actions in order to scale back considering and dealing skills. Additional, noise air pollution… engulfs each nook and nook of the globe, reaching its peak in city areas. Industries, vehicles, rail engines, aeroplanes, radios, loudspeakers, tape recorders, lottery ticket sellers, hawkers, pop singers, and many others., are the principle ear contaminators of the town space and its market”. On this register, Justice Oka proceeds to archive alarming conditions that come up from the indifference of the state in direction of the implementation of the regulation and the foundations in opposition to such air pollution.
He thus quotes from a US scientific report saying that such acts “threaten foetal growth. Noise has been linked to low beginning weights. Ranges of noise which don’t intrude with the notion of speech by adults could intrude considerably with the notion of speech by youngsters in addition to with the acquisition of speech, language, and language-related talent”. Not merely it stresses foetal well being, however emphasizes the discovering that “youngsters have extra issue in understanding language within the presence of noise than adults do. Studying skill additionally could also be critically impaired by noise.”
This poignant concern with the rights to well being of the but unborn elevates a brand new social studying formation to a brand new function and standing, going a lot past the laws and rule, even when deeply solicitous of those. The discovered justice insists on “creating normal consciousness in direction of the hazardous results of noise air pollution”.
In the direction of this finish, he proposes that “Appropriate chapters could also be added within the textbooks which train civic sense to the youngsters and youth on the preliminary/early-level of training. Particular talks and lectures be organised within the faculties to focus on the menace of noise air pollution and the function of the youngsters and youthful era in stopping it. Police and civil administration ought to be skilled to know the assorted strategies to curb the issue and likewise the noise air pollution and the function of the youngsters and youthful era in stopping it. Police and civil administration ought to be skilled to know the assorted strategies to curb the issue and likewise the legal guidelines on the topic.” Further, whereas “the state should play an lively function on this course of, Resident Welfare Associations, service golf equipment and societies engaged in stopping noise air pollution as part of their noise air pollution and the function of the youngsters and youthful era in stopping it. Police and civil administration ought to be skilled to know the assorted strategies to curb the issue and likewise the legal guidelines on the topic.”
THE RIGHT TO PRIVACY [R2P]
Within the context of a PIL difficult a whole ban imposed on the slaughter of bulls and bullocks in Maharashtra, together with a “ban… on possessing the flesh of cow, bull or bullock slaughtered inside and outdoors the state”, Justice Oka noticed that “by introducing Part 9B, on the trial of sure offences, a damaging burden was placed on the accused”. We don’t right here tarry with the reasoning of Justice Oka, and the knowledge of precedents cited that compels the conclusion that “violation of Article 25(1) of the Structure of India is under no circumstances attracted” on this case; what’s extra attention-grabbing is the judicial articulation, in seven main circumstances, of R2P, previous to its fuller recognition later as a basic and even pure proper by the apex court docket in Puttaswamy resolution (in 2017).
What strikes, with awe and marvel, is the next passage (in Para 192) of the discovered opinion:
“So far as the selection of consuming meals of the residents is worried, the residents are required to be not to mention particularly when the meals of their selection just isn’t injurious to well being. As noticed earlier, even a proper to sleep is held as part of proper to privateness which is assured below Article 21 of the Structure of India. In truth, the state can not management what a citizen does in his home which is his personal citadel, offered he’s not doing one thing which is opposite to regulation. The state can not make an intrusion into his residence and stop a citizen from possessing and consuming meals of his selection. A citizen has a proper to guide a significant life inside the 4 corners of his home in addition to outdoors his home. This intrusion on the private lifetime of a person is prohibited by the correct to privateness which is a part of private liberty assured by Article 21. The state can not forestall a citizen from possessing and consuming a specific kind of meals which isn’t injurious to well being”.
My excessive regard for the rights of animals (who I title as NHA (non-human animal individuals) raises right here a query: In what conditions good constitutional practices could abrogate altogether social plurality and variety? I’m content material, on this rating, to just accept some limits supplied right here by Justice Oka.
In a way, Justice Oka should be recognised as among the many founders of the R2P as a result of he lastly holds that “Part 5D must be struck down as being violative of basic proper assured by Article 21 of the Structure of India”. Subsequent to the Puttaswamy resolution—the continuing Frank Vitus case (see, Upendra Baxi, India Authorized, “Huge Brother Watching You”. April 11, 2024), proceeds to counsel how the R2P could confront even the newly pursued apply of the Indian police, making it a compulsory, as a situation for the grant of the bail to share the google pin throughout investigation.
COURAGE OF CONVICTION
The creativity in judicial interpretation at all times marches in Justice Oka with a uncommon braveness of conviction that the responsibly for adherence to the rule of regulation and constitutionalism lies not simply upon the leaders of governments (the manager and political events) or the judiciary. All companies of the State should act totally, and extra rigorously, in accordance with the regulation and Structure along side social motion actions for change serving the rights to freedom assured by the Structure.
Courts and justices could perform to ascertain a constitutional tradition of peace and plurality, and co-equal dignity of esteem for all residents. This essentially vetoes (as Justice Oka mentioned in his farewell handle) a “Chief Justice-centric court docket” and requires “a extra democratic… administrative method”, contemplating “the court docket’s numerous composition…”
Justice Abhay S Oka has diligently occupied a spot of satisfaction within the Indian judicial pantheon in troublesome nationwide occasions in a turbulent world.
—The author is an internationally-renowned regulation scholar, an acclaimed trainer and a well known writer, at all times eager to study from different views
