Q. “The concept of Just and Unjust is contextual. What was just a year back, may turn out to be unjust in today’s context. Changing context should be constantly under scrutiny to prevent miscarriage of justice.” Examine the above statement with suitable examples.

Model Answer:

Justice is a dynamic, evolving ideal driven by societal, technological, and moral advancements, making ethical relativism and transformative constitutionalism essential paradigms.

Evolution of Justice: Contextual Relativity

• Shifting Social Morality: Victorian-era norms justified criminalizing homosexuality, which is now deemed profoundly unjust (Navtej Singh Johar case).
• Redefining Gender Parity: Adultery laws treating women as male property were once legal norms, now recognized as unconstitutional (Joseph Shine case).
• Evolving Environmental Ethics: Unfettered resource exploitation was historically viewed as ‘development’, now condemned as intergenerational injustice (Climate Change litigation).

Imperative of Continuous Scrutiny to Prevent Injustice

• Technological Disruption: The digital age mandates constant legal evolution to protect human dignity (Puttaswamy case – Right to Privacy).
• Dismantling Systemic Oppression: Outdated frameworks require proactive review to prevent normalized state overreach (Scrutiny of Colonial-era Sedition laws).
• Progressive Realization of Rights: Institutional vigilance bridges the gap between static legislation and expanding constitutional morality.
• Addressing Normalized Wrongs: Constant evaluation prevents historical legal exceptions from perpetuating silent injustices (Ongoing scrutiny of marital rape exceptions).

To prevent the miscarriage of justice, ethical and legal frameworks must co-evolve proactively, ensuring that constitutional morality consistently outpaces static societal prejudices.