10 Judgements That Changed India by Zia Mody Summary

10 Judgements That Changed India by Zia Mody examines ten landmark Supreme Court rulings that reshaped India’s legal and social landscape. Key cases include the Kesavananda Bharati verdict (establishing the Constitution’s “basic structure” doctrine), the Shah Bano alimony dispute (testing secularism), and the Vishaka guidelines (defining workplace sexual harassment). The book analyzes their constitutional implications, societal impacts, and enduring relevance in modern democracy.

This book suits law students, legal professionals, and general readers interested in India’s judicial history. Zia Mody’s accessible writing makes complex rulings like the Olga Tellis case (right to livelihood) and the Union Carbide disaster (corporate liability) understandable for non-experts. It’s particularly valuable for understanding how court decisions influence civil rights, environmental policies, and gender justice.

Yes, for its lucid breakdown of pivotal cases like the Maneka Gandhi verdict (expanding personal liberties) and the Nilabati Behera custodial death ruling. Mody contextualizes legal jargon into real-world consequences, such as how the Indra Sawhney judgment shaped India’s reservation system. The book bridges academic rigor and public discourse, offering insights into judicial activism’s role in democracy.

Zia Mody, founder of AZB & Partners, is a prominent corporate lawyer with degrees from Cambridge and Harvard. While known for mergers and acquisitions, her expertise in constitutional law shines in this book. Her dual perspective as a practitioner and analyst lends credibility to critiques of cases like the Aruna Shanbaug euthanasia debate.

The book dissects 10 landmark cases:

• Kesavananda Bharati v. Kerala (1973): Constitutional “basic structure” doctrine.
• Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): Right to life and due process.
• Shah Bano Case (1985): Muslim women’s alimony rights.
• Vishaka v. Rajasthan (1997): Workplace sexual harassment guidelines.

Mody details how the 1985 Shah Bano ruling—granting alimony to a divorced Muslim woman—sparked debates on secularism vs. religious personal laws. The backlash led to the Muslim Women Act, 1986, which diluted the judgment. The case remains a benchmark for conflicts between gender justice and communal politics.

Key themes include:

• Environmental jurisprudence: Union Carbide’s Bhopal gas tragedy liability.
• Custodial rights: Compensation for police brutality in Nilabati Behera.
• Affirmative action: Reservations ceiling in Indra Sawhney.
• End-of-life rights: Euthanasia ethics in Aruna Shanbaug.

Yes. Mody avoids excessive jargon, using timelines and case narrations to simplify concepts. For example, she explains the Olga Tellis slum dwellers’ case through human stories, showing how “right to livelihood” became part of Article 21. Complex ideas like judicial review are broken into relatable examples.

Mody praises the judiciary’s activism in expanding rights (e.g., Vishaka guidelines) but critiques delays, like the 14-year Bhopal gas tragedy litigation. She highlights inconsistencies, such as the Shah Bano reversal, but overall reaffirms the courts’ role in upholding democratic values.

While Bhushan’s book focuses solely on the Kesavananda Bharati case, Mody’s work offers a broader survey across civil, criminal, and constitutional law. Both highlight judicial independence, but 10 Judgements provides a panoramic view of India’s legal evolution through diverse cases.

With ongoing debates on euthanasia, reservations, and environmental policies, Mody’s analysis of past rulings offers context for current issues. For instance, the Vishaka guidelines underpin #MeToo-era workplace policies, while the Kesavananda Bharati case remains cited in constitutional challenges.

Mody combines corporate law expertise with constitutional analysis, offering fresh angles. For example, she ties the Union Carbide verdict to modern corporate accountability debates. Her access to case histories and legal strategy nuances enriches discussions on judicial decision-making.