LIJDLR

reformative justice

THE PHILOSOPHY OF KARMA: EXPLORING THE PARALLELS WITH MODERN LEGAL SYSTEM

Volume III Issue III /

THE PHILOSOPHY OF KARMA: EXPLORING THE PARALLELS WITH MODERN LEGAL SYSTEM Raj Patel, BBA LL.B (H), School of Law, ITM University, Naya Raipur (C.G.), India Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2025.v03.101 The philosophy of Karma is a universal and timeless concept rooted in ancient Indian traditions, indexing the principles of action, intention, and consequence, which lay the foundation for the justice system. This paper examines the philosophy of Karma as a moral framework of action, intention, and consequence, and explores its parallels with the modern legal justice system. The research aims to examine how the Karmic notion of accountability and impartial justice aligns with constitutional principles, including equality before the law, natural justice, and reformative punishment. Methodologically, the paper adopts a doctrinal approach, relying on primary sources from Vedic literature and judicial decisions, along with secondary commentary from legal scholarship. The study finds that while Karma operates as a universal and moral law of causation, its principles are reflected in the corrective, restorative, and retributive functions of modern legal systems. Case law analysis, including Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan, Mohd. Giasuddin v. State of Andhra Pradesh and Brown v. Board of Education demonstrate how courts embody the spirit of karmic justice by ensuring fairness, accountability, and opportunities for redemption. The paper concludes that integrating karmic philosophy into legal discourse can enrich contemporary jurisprudence by aligning law with ethical responsibility and universal values.

THE PHILOSOPHY OF KARMA: EXPLORING THE PARALLELS WITH MODERN LEGAL SYSTEM Read More »

EVALUATING THE RELEVANCE OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS IN INDIA

Volume III Issue I /

EVALUATING THE RELEVANCE OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS IN INDIA Kaifi Khan, 10th Semester, B.A.LL.B Student at Amity Law School Lucknow, Amity University Uttar Pradesh Abhishek Mishra, Assistant Professor at Amity Law School Lucknow, Amity University Uttar Pradesh Download Manuscript doi.org/10.70183/lijdlr.2024.v03.19 This research paper critically evaluates the relevance of capital punishment in India by examining constitutional provisions, statutory frameworks, judicial precedents, and international perspectives. It analyses the evolution of the “rarest of rare” doctrine and explores the judicial inconsistencies in death sentencing. The paper highlights how procedural safeguards under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita aim to restrict arbitrary imposition of the death penalty. It examines arguments both supporting and opposing capital punishment, drawing attention to the disproportionate impact on the poor and marginalised, the psychological trauma of prolonged death row incarceration, and the global trend towards abolition. The study underscores the shift in judicial thinking from retributive to reformative justice, favouring life imprisonment without remission as a constitutionally sustainable alternative. Drawing from comparative jurisprudence and human rights standards, the research concludes that capital punishment, while legally permitted, is increasingly seen as morally and pragmatically redundant. It proposes reforms aimed at structured sentencing, better legal aid, and a reconsideration of the death penalty’s place within a democratic and rights-based legal framework committed to dignity and justice. Type Information Research Paper LawFoyer International Journal of Doctrinal Legal Research, Volume III, Issue I, Page 418-444. Creative Commons Copyright This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. © Authors, 2024

EVALUATING THE RELEVANCE OF CAPITAL PUNISHMENT: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF JUDICIAL PRONOUNCEMENTS IN INDIA Read More »