scorecardresearch
Thursday, March 28, 2024
Support Our Journalism
HomeOpinionNewsmaker of the WeekConfused over celebrating Kamini Lau in Azad case? She has always been...

Confused over celebrating Kamini Lau in Azad case? She has always been a controversial judge

From calling for chemical castration of rapists to calling out an HC judge for 'targeting' her to 'overzealous trials', judge Kamini Lau has done it all.

Follow Us :
Text Size:

Additional Sessions Judge Kamini Lau asked the public prosecutor these questions while hearing Bhim Army Chief Chandrashekhar Azad’s bail plea Tuesday:

“Have you read the Constitution?”
“Who says you cannot protest?”
“You are behaving as if Jama Masjid is Pakistan.”

The matter was then adjourned for a day, but by then, she had been hailed as the “hero of the day” and a “candle of hope”. That candle of hope melted soon.

The next day, while granting Chandrashekhar Azad bail, judge Lau banished Azad from Delhi for a month and placed several restrictions on him. Those who had lauded her earlier were confused.

But Kamini Lau is no stranger to controversy, and with her Azad judgment, she is ThePrint’s newsmaker of the week.

From calling for chemical castration of rapists to calling out an HC judge for “targeting” her, judge Kamini Lau has done it all.


Also read: ‘Shouldn’t disrespect PM, why name RSS?’ Judge gives Chandrashekhar Azad advice with bail


Chemical castration, ‘crying need of the hour’

In April 2011, Kamini Lau suggested that “an alternative punishment castration of rapists is the crying need of the hour” and sought a public debate on the issue. Awarding a 10-year jail term to a man who repeatedly raped his 15-year-old stepdaughter over four years, Lau had lamented the lack of such a provision. She referred to similar experiments in different countries to bolster her case.

And this wasn’t the only time she spoke of the idea.

Four years later in 2015, she acquitted two people of the charges of forcibly castrating a man as the victim had himself opted for emasculation for securing the ‘badhai‘ rights that transgenders have.

In doing so, Lau called it “ironical and hypocritical” that while a man can get castrate himself for monetary gains, any suggestion for castration of serial rapists is called “Talibanic”.


Also read: Chandrashekhar Azad gets bail, Delhi court tells him to stay in Saharanpur home for 4 weeks


‘State cannot abdicate responsibility’

Lau grew up around lawyers – her father was Delhi’s standing counsel and three of her siblings are practising lawyers. She has a doctorate in criminology.

Since joining the services in 1992, several of her orders have grabbed eyeballs — for both good and bad reasons.

She has also always called for discussions on various legal issues, ranging from marital rape to polygamy under Sharia law.

In an order passed in March 2014, judge Lau had urged the legislatures to take “serious note of the rampant marital sexual abuse”.

“She [the wife alleging sexual abuse by her husband] is the responsibility of the State and is required to be taken care of just as any other victim of aggravated sexual assault and abuse and the State cannot abdicate its responsibility and she cannot be discriminated only because she happens to be the wife of the sexual aggressor,” she had said.

Her observation was cited by advocate Karuna Nundy in her famous plea in Delhi high court to criminalise marital rape.

In December 2012, Lau denied anticipatory bail to a maulvi accused of marrying a girl forcibly to a married man. In her order, she asserted that the Quran only allows polygamy under certain special circumstances and does not encourage it.

At the same time, in December 2015, she lamented the misuse of dowry harassment laws, while discharging a man who was accused of harassing his sister-in-law for dowry.

She had then called the misuse of Section 498A (cruelty by husband or his relatives) by the women as “legal terrorism” and “gross human rights violation”.


Also read: SC wants lower courts to speed up rape trials, but 26% judge vacancies make it difficult


‘Overzealous’ with ‘super fast-track trials’

Lau has shown unusual haste in several cases. So much so that many of her judgments had to be kept aside.

Speaking to ThePrint, a lawyer who has appeared before judge Lau in several cases called her judgments well-intentioned, but “overzealous”. And he wasn’t the only one who thought so.

A two-judge bench of the Delhi high court in February 2018 set aside a judgment passed by Lau, who, in order to speed up a murder trial, had taken the evidence of 22 witnesses on the first day of the trial. Lau had passed the judgment in October 2014, when she was posted at Delhi’s Rohini Court.

The high court felt that the speed with which she conducted the trial was an “overreaction”.

The court also noted that this was “not for the first time” in her “enthusiasm for speeding up the trial process” that judge Lau had “seriously erred in examining many prosecution witnesses on a single day”.

The same month, another one of her judgments was set aside for similar reasons, after she had examined 22 prosecution witnesses on the day the legal aid counsel for the accused was appointed. Setting aside the judgment pronounced by her, the court had observed that the “zeal of a trial judge to ensure speedy justice should not defeat the constitutional guarantee of a fair trial”.

However, her adjudication of the 2010 Mirchpur lynching case in a record nine months was lauded throughout, and upheld by the Delhi High Court.

Fast-track court has assumed a new meaning under Lau.


Also read: Delhi court grants bail to 15 people arrested during anti-CAA protests in Daryaganj


Slapped with contempt of court

Lau strongly voices her opinion inside the courtroom, keeping the lawyers addressing her constantly on their feet.

However, this has also landed her in trouble in the past.

A Delhi High Court bench comprising Justices Valmiki J. Mehta and Indermeet Kaur had come down heavily on Lau in December 2017, after she alleged that she was being “selectively and successively targeted” by another judge. This was after the high court judge had set aside some of Lau’s orders and made some adverse remarks against her.

She was then slapped with contempt of court, after which she approached the Supreme Court, asserting that the higher courts “should judge the judgments and not the judge”.

The Supreme Court had asked Lau to tender an unconditional apology to Delhi High Court, putting the controversy to rest.

Subscribe to our channels on YouTube, Telegram & WhatsApp

Support Our Journalism

India needs fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. ThePrint – with exceptional reporters, columnists and editors – is doing just that.

Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you.

Whether you live in India or overseas, you can take a paid subscription by clicking here.

Support Our Journalism

4 COMMENTS

  1. Although, there is a belief that someone vocal against the prevailing condition of a state, he or she is a mad, a radical, a rough and tough person !!But, Hon.Lau has been doing right thing as per my views and she deserves appreciation and respect !! Pro-establishment–OK! But there should be an open mind and thinking ,particularly in this profession , where some revolutionary and radical views also pays!!

    • Compare the relief given to Azad with the mindless prison terms for Chidambaram
      BJP government will soon implement the justice loya formula if this trend continues that is if the judge is not pliable transfer him
      Late mr Jaitley often spoke about banana republic and he saw to it that indiA indeed is transformed into one
      May his soul rest in peace

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular