India, July 13 -- The first principle of any constitutional democracy is almost axiomatic: judicial determinations are assailed through appellate review, not through orchestrated campaigns of intimidation. A judgment belongs in a court of law, vendetta nowhere. Yet the sustained campaign directed against Additional District and Sessions Judge Tabassum Khan following her verdict in the Barakheda lynching case compels us to confront a disquieting constitutional reality.

The issue has grown beyond the correctness of a criminal conviction to whether judicial independence can survive vilification, communal targeting and overt threats for discharging their constitutional obligations.

Whether Judge Khan's conclusions are ultimately affirmed, ...