The 39A Podcast

Episode 26 of the 39A Podcast discusses the recent Pune Porsche case where a 17-year-old allegedly caused the death of two hapless victims while driving rashly and under the influence. The case has made waves in the media due to reports of preferential treatment and manipulation of evidence. However, the case also invokes questions of Juvenile Justice law which are largely unaddressed by mainstream media.

In this podcast, Anup Surendranath converses with child rights experts— Bharati Ali, Swagata Raha and Mahesh Menon, who bring decades of experience with the juvenile justice system and analyse the legal and procedural aspects of juvenile justice in India. The discussion focuses on provisions for bail in the case of juvenile offenders, when can a child be tried as an adult, how the said determination is made, whether the mental capacity of the child can be determined, and the systemic issues in observation homes and places of safety. The conversation also delves into the more theoretical aspects of crime and punishment, and why there is a need to treat juvenile delinquents differently than adult offenders.

Dr. Penelope Tong (Fieldwork Supervisor, Tata Institute of Social Sciences) discusses her doctoral research on the needs of families of murder victims in Mumbai, with Baljeet Kaur (former senior mitigation investigator at P39A).

Dr. Tong’s research finds that most cases of murder arise due to escalation of interpersonal conflicts, particularly in socio-economically impoverished communities. Though the police are often approached at the first instance of strained interpersonal dynamics, they are ill-equipped to resolve and prevent further conflict. Further, in the aftermath of murder, victims’ families are forced to navigate emotional distress, alienation and an inaccessible legal system. For victims’ families to heal and move forward, a holistic recognition of their needs and a conception of justice that goes beyond punishing the offender, is required.

Can the criminal justice system, as it stands today, address such complex needs and treat families of victims justly? In this podcast, Dr. Penelope Tong and Baljeet Kaur discuss the need for the criminal justice system to expand its imagination of justice for families of murder victims.

In this podcast, Project 39A's Director (Sentencing) Neetika Vishwanath speaks to Dr. Mayur Suresh (Senior Lecturer, SOAS University of London) on his recently published book 'Terror Trials: Life and Law in Delhi's Courts'. The book is an ethnographic study of Delhi's Tis Hazari court over 14 months during which Dr. Suresh followed 18 terrorism trials. In this conversation, Dr. Suresh reflects on the relevance of ethnography as a method of legal research and the value of studying everyday life in trial courts. Looking beyond the exceptionalism framework in academia that is often used to describe terrorism laws and trials, ethnography allowed Dr. Suresh to capture ways in which terror accused use legal procedures and technicalities to engage with the law.

In this episode of the 39A Podcast, Neetika Vishwanath is in conversation with Kirsten Han, journalist and anti-depth penalty activist based in Singapore. In the backdrop of an alarming rate of executions in Singapore in 2022, Kirsten gives the listeners a first-hand account. The Podcast discusses the anti-drug trafficking law in Singapore, the 2012 amendment and its problematic implementation, discriminatory use of the death penalty, and hefty fines on death penalty lawyers. Kirsten also reflects on Singaporean government’s unverified assumption that the death penalty deters the use of drugs.

The widely critiqued Supreme Court decision in Vijay Mandanlal Chaudhary is pending review. In this context, Shri Singh and Maneka Khanna discuss broader issues with the Supreme Court’s judgement and the money laundering law, particularly, the grave implications of a special law devoid of clarity, certainty and workability. Mr Singh is a criminal defence lawyer, with extensive experience litigating white-collar crimes and offences under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002.

In this episode of the 39A Podcast, Aditya Mehta speaks to Senior Advocate Aabad Ponda about the limits of the recent Supreme Court judgement in addressing an accused’s right against self-incrimination.

Access our exclusive coverage of the PMLA judgement here - www.p39ablog.com/2022/07/27/pmla-explained/

In light of the recent Supreme Court judgement in Vijay Madanlal Chaudhary, Harsh Srivastava speaks to Arshdeep Singh Khurana about navigating future money-laundering cases from the perspective of a defence lawyer. Mr. Singh represented a number of petitioners in this case, and has an extensive legal practice in the courts of New Delhi, and Punjab and Haryana.

The Supreme Court’s recent judgment, dismissing challenges to various provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, has had its fair share of critique. In this podcast, Harsh Srivastava speaks to Advocate Arshdeep Singh Khurana about the insights from the judgment for defense lawyers navigating future money-laundering cases. Mr. Singh has an extensive legal practice in the courts of New Delhi, primarily relating to white collar crimes. Further, he represented one of the petitioners in this case.

In light of Supreme Court's recent judgment upholding various provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Shivani Misra of Project 39A speaks to Senior Advocate Aman Lekhi on what the Supreme Court could have done differently while balancing the rights of the individual against the State's power.

Visit https://p39ablog.com/2022/07/27/pmla-explained/

In light of the Supreme Court quashing the Delhi High Court judgement disallowing the termination of pregnancy after 24 weeks; Anupriya Dhonchak speaks to Dr. Aparna Chandra about the undue barriers that hinder access to safe abortion in India.

In the backdrop of the US Supreme Court's reversal of Roe v. Wade, this conversation considers the impact of paternalistic state policies in undermining the bodily integrity and personal autonomy of women, and argues for locating the right to abortion within the framework of substantive equality.