•Whether judges should be required to reveal their assets is thought provoking (‘Accountable or not’, IE, August 6). There are many youths who stand at the crossroads of their lives with utmost respect and value for the legal profession. Debates on the sanctity of the judiciary may challenge youthful idealism, but is nevertheless empowering for that same youth. As we debate the necessity of our judges declaring their assets, we are also addressing the needs of posterity.

— Gurpreet S. Goraya

Pune

Exult not

•All three accused in the 2003 Mumbai blast cases have been sentenced to death by the trial court (‘Death sentence for three...’, IE, August 7). The judgment has made the prosecution over-glorify its victory. Are they unaware of the labyrinthine intricacies of criminal law? Is it not the case that any

accused, though found guilty, can appeal to higher courts in all countries?

Such cases are normally prolonged, often taking decades to be resolved.

— Arun Malankar

Mumbai

Many disparities

•Is the education bill really revolutionary? One can’t help being sceptical when such grandiose claims are made. The HRD ministry thinks it is a definite break with t he past, but elementary education will still hardly be uniform. At present, there’s a deep divide between the quality of education in state-run schools and state-aided schools on the one hand and good private schools on the other. They obviously cater to different segments of society and set their standards accordingly. Is this true equality?

... contd.