A Question We Don't Like to Ask Here’s a question that makes most people uncomfortable: if the police shoot a man dead before any court has heard his side, who exactly decided he was guilty? We’ve all grown up watching news anchors call it an “encounter” almost like it’s a good word — a clean word, a word that sounds like justice finally happened. A criminal was caught, shots were fired, and the criminal is now dead. End of story, right? Except it isn’t the end of the story.

Can a country that calls itself a constitutional democracy — one that has elevated dignity to the heart of its fundamental rights — force a man to keep living when life, as he once knew it, ended thirteen years ago? A Boy Who Fell, and a Family That Never Stopped Falling In August 2013, Harish Rana was nineteen years old. He was a student in Chandigarh — young, alive, full of whatever quiet ambitions nineteen-year-olds carry in their chests. Then one day, he fell from the f

The Case That Changed Everything On a November morning in 2001, in Punjab, a woman named Reshma lost her life in a road accident caused by another driver's rash and negligent driving. Reshma was a homemaker — she had no salary slip, no office to report to, and no income on paper. Her husband and three children approached the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal for compensation and were awarded just ₹2.42 lakh in 2003. Years of appeals followed. By 2024, the Punjab and Haryana High