The Nupur Sharma case exposes a deeper judicial crisis in India, where fear of violent reaction overrides constitutional principles. This analysis examines how Supreme Court observations during a procedural hearing inverted causality by blaming a speaker for violence committed by others, abandoning free-speech doctrine, reasoned adjudication, and dharmic concepts of justice.
This article examines the Buddhist Reservation Paradox—how Buddhists retain Scheduled Caste benefits while explicitly rejecting the Hindu framework that created those protections. By tracing constitutional amendments, Ambedkarite ideology, judicial patterns, and ethical principles of Dharma, it argues that reservation has become a right detached from responsibility, raising serious questions of equity, gratitude, and constitutional consistency.