Representation and Legitimacy in the Supreme Court: Adjudicating Law and Religion in India

This article presents the argument that the Supreme Court of India’s jurisprudence on procedural bars to litigation is insufficient to address challenges that arise in cases involving religious rights. Examining the Court’s views on standing (the right to litigate) in three key public interest decisions (the Sabarimala Temple case, the Ram Janmabhoomi case, and the triple talaq case), I argue that the Court has privileged a discretionary, ends-based reasoning over an approach based on principle and law, resulting in erratic and inconsistent outcomes. The result is an uncertain level of protection to minority rights in judicial processes.