Liberal or otherwise

In the Judge Loya death case, Chnadrachud Jr. J. verdict was not as per the expectation of some people. So, his action has been described like this, "One case that remains Justice Chandrachud’s Achilles’ heel is his judgment in the case around the death of CBI Judge BH Loya, who was presiding over the Sohrabuddin trial. Along with the bench, Justice Chandrachud dismissed a probe to investigate CBI Judge BH Loya’s death, who died under suspicious circumstances, according to The Caravan’s report."

Achilles' heel!!!! Seriously??? If he has delivered other judgement correctly, we can have faith in him here as well and if he is wrong here, how is he the champion crusader? Only a few days ago, he was heavily criticized for his judgement and now he being hailed a hero!! Selective amnesia or cherry picking?? Interestingly, this is how Chandrachud Jr. J. himself describes the action of petitioners in the judge Loya death case, "The conduct of the petitioners and the intervenors scandalizes the process of the court and prima facie constitutes criminal contempt." There are other interesting and scathing comments as well. You may read those and also find out who were the petitioners in the case. You may also argue, hey, every judgement is an independent one and he might be right in all or wrong in all or right in some and wrong in some. That's exactly the point.

So, in this "post truth era which has a certain cut-off date because before that we were actually analyzing policies and thereafter only making informed choices and we were certainly not driven by emotions and our commitment to constitutional values was impeccable (Wikipedia defines Post-truth politics as a political culture in which debate is framed largely by appeals to emotion disconnected from the details of policy, and by the repeated assertion of talking points to which factual rebuttals are ignored), the question that we should be asking ourselves is, "Are we applying our mind to the facts presented before us from all angles and then taking a call or are we just cherry picking facts/opinions to suit our narrative?

Please note that whether you are on this side of the divide or that side of the divide, you are guilty (हिंदी में एक कहावत है- "इस हमाम में सभी नंगे हैं |"). Though, you would like to debate who is more guilty and thus decide the punishment accordingly, but then while trying to ascertain who started this nonsense first, remember that the history of this country goes back to at least 5000 yrs and most probably everyone will have a claim that it's the other side that started the nonsense first.
My only suggestion is before we form an opinion, we must weigh both sides. If we follow say something like "The Wire" , then we must follow something from the other side of the spectrum as well and vice versa.

Dig in, find out the real stuff and then choose your side because you then will have the real conviction based on concrete facts and not hearsay. However, do watch out for fake sources. Argue ferociously but listen to other side as well. Also remember that some people do carry self serving agenda. You might be thinking that you are serving a great cause, but it might be that you are instead serving someone else agenda.