'Gen-Z Assured Us That Democracy Will Not Be Allowed To Die': Ex-Justice S Muralidhar

Senior Advocate and former Orissa High Court Chief Justice S Muralidhar has said the recent Gen Z-led student protests at Jantar Mantar reflected the resilience of Indian democracy, while raising concerns over the use of criminal law against peaceful demonstrations.

Speaking at the 28th DS Borker Memorial Lecture on ‘My Vision of India’, Muralidhar said the protests held during the week of July 20 showed that young citizens were willing to question those in power and rely on constitutional values to protect the country’s future, LiveLaw reported.

“The recent protests by Gen-Z assure us that democracy in India will not be allowed to die and that people will turn to the Constitution to safeguard and preserve this country's future,” he was quoted as saying.

Muralidhar said the younger generation had not been shaped by political messaging and propaganda, adding that protesters remained unaffected by attempts to label them as “Dimagi Naxal”. He highlighted what he described as Gen Z’s readiness to question authority, commitment to truth and “wonderful sense of humour”.

“The week of 20th July this year was one of relief and joy,” he said, adding that the generation’s irreverence was “a sure sign of democratic progress.”

Speaking about his vision for India in 2047, Muralidhar said laws should not be used to suppress criticism of the government, including satire, cartoons and jokes by stand-up comedians. He also called for an end to criminal proceedings against those peacefully protesting over the denial of basic rights.

He advocated repealing preventive detention laws and provisions under laws such as the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), particularly those involving stringent bail conditions.

Muralidhar also raised concerns over delays in the judicial system, saying that the judiciary of 2047 should not take years to decide major constitutional matters. He cited delays in cases concerning the conversion of a state into a Union Territory, demonetisation and electoral bonds.

He called for an independent Bar and reforms in the Bar Council of India to make it more democratic and free from executive and judicial influence.

Questioning the effectiveness of fast-track courts for paper leak cases, Muralidhar asked whether assigning existing judges additional responsibilities would address delays. He also criticised the absence of judicial impact assessments before legislative changes, citing the 1988 amendment that criminalised cheque bouncing, which he said contributed to nearly 40 lakh pending cases and around 40 per cent of cases before Magistrate Courts.

Muralidhar also stressed the need for greater digitisation of court records, pointing out that delays often occur when lawyers and judges do not receive case files on time.

He further criticised traditional court practices and forms of address such as “Your Lordship”, describing them as remnants of “patriarchy” and “feudalism”, and called for a judicial system that is more focused on litigants.