Book Review: The Court and the the Constitution of India Summits and Shallows

I find the requirement for law students to study bulky books and numerous cases in the constitutional law syllabus is puzzling. As Buxi points " It (this book) departs from the models of weighty treatises on the subject (such as books by Durga Das Basu, H.M. Seervai, and M. P. Jain)".Most of the cases mentioned in these books are rarely revisited by students or law teachers. Understanding the cases without delving into their context and historical background is very challenging, as these books mainly consist of commentaries. I believe that Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy's book "The Court and the Constitution of India, Summits and Shallows" provides a background story that makes studying the Indian Constitution easier and more fruitful. If I had read this book earlier, it would have made my journey as a lawyer much smoother.

The book consists of 30 chapters compiled within 300 pages. Justice Chinnappa holds rational views and identifies as an atheist. He is one of the few judges of Indigenous or backward background in terms of the constitution. However, he holds beliefs in the Vedas and considers Shudras as the upper caste of society. He does not justify this statement in the book with logic or archaeological evidence. In reality, most Shudras in India are disadvantaged and underprivileged, with low representation in the judiciary, civil services, higher education institutions, and even in the cabinet of the Indian Parliament. Despite being an atheist, he fails to criticize the first Chief Justice of the Republic of India when he states his intention to embed "emblems of God" into the Indian Judiciary.

Justice Chinnappa criticizes most of the Judges appointed to the Supreme Court. Failures such as A K Gopalan, Golaknath, and ADM Jabalpur are a few examples of the judiciary's failure to uphold directive principles and respect individual rights. He views the three judges' cases as a misfortune for Indian democracy that may lead to judicial oligarchy. He finds that Justice D Y Chandrachud, after serving as Chief Justice for 8 years, failed to achieve anything remarkable. He prefers a single judge for the appointment of judges over the current collegium system. However, he believes that the appointment and transfer of judges by a single judge or collegium violates the principle of natural justice, as no one can be a judge for his own cause. He also deems the appointment of judges to high posts after retirement as legally unsound.

Despite focusing on criticisms of the judiciary, an exception to this is Justice V R Krishna Iyer, whom he regards as one of the most creative judges of the Supreme Court. He acknowledges Justice Iyer's contributions in cases such as Menika Gandhi, Hussainara Khatoon, and Bachan Singh. 

It may be exaggerating if I say this book should be part of the syllabus for law students. But, as I have been criticizing the syllabus drafted by BCI, this exaggeration is overarching.