New Zealand win maiden Women's T20 World Cup as South Africa falter in successive final
Dubai, Oct 20: New Zealand produced a clinical performance in a high-stakes final to beat South Africa by 32 runs and win their maiden Women's T20 World Cup title here on Sunday.
It turned out to be a historic Sunday for New Zealand cricket as the White Ferns got their hands on the ICC trophy hours after the men recorded their first Test win in India after 36 years.
South Africa, playing their second successive final, sent New Zealand in to bat and the Sophie Devine-led side thrived under pressure to post an above par 158 for five at the Dubai International Cricket Stadium.
Amelia Kerr collected 43 off 38 balls while Brooke Halliday made an impactful 38 off 28 balls to push New Zealand beyond 150 in what has been a low scoring tournament.
South Africa skipper Laura Wolvaardt (33 off 27) took her team to 47 for no loss in the powerplay before New Zealand bowlers were able to stifle the opposition.
South Africa could not keep with the scoring rate and ended with 126 for nine in 20 overs. Kerr starred with her leg-spin as well, ending with three wickets for 24 runs in four overs.
It was a remarkable change of fortunes for New Zealand, who had come into the tournament with the baggage of 10 losses in a row. They were the best bowling unit in the competition by a fair distance and on Sunday, improved their batting by a few notches.
There was no coming back from South Africa after they lost their gutsy leader Wolvaardt in the 10th over. Kerr got the prized wicket as Wolvaardt, in her attempt to accelerate the scoring rate, found Suzie Bates at cover.
When the hero of the semifinal, Anneke Bosch, perished five balls later, the writing was on the wall. South Africa's untested middle-order could not respond to the pressure put by the New Zealand bowlers.
Brief scores:
New Zealand 158/5 in 20 overs (Amelia Kerr 43, Brooke Halliday 38; Nonkululeko Mlaba 2/31).
South Africa 126/9 in 20 overs (Laura Wolvaardt 33, Amelia Kerr 3/24).
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Deep societal faultlines persist despite 75 years of independence: Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
Judge cites denial of home to Muslim girl, opposition to Dalit women cooking mid-day meals
Hyderabad, February 23, 2026: Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan has said that despite repeated affirmations of constitutional morality by courts, deep societal faultlines rooted in caste and religious discrimination continue to shape everyday realities in India.
Speaking at a seminar on “Constitutional Morality and the Role of District Judiciary” organised by the Telangana Judges Association and the Telangana State Judicial Academy in Hyderabad, Justice Bhuyan reflected on the gap between constitutional ideals and social practices.
He cited a recent instance involving his daughter’s friend, a PhD scholar at a private university in Noida, who was denied accommodation in South Delhi after her surname revealed her Muslim identity. According to Justice Bhuyan, the landlady bluntly informed her that no accommodation was available once her religious background became known.
In another example from Odisha, he referred to resistance by some parents to the government’s mid-day meal programme because the food was prepared by Dalit women employed as cooks. He noted that some parents had objected aggressively and refused to allow their children to consume meals cooked by members of the Scheduled Caste community.
Describing these incidents as “the tip of the iceberg,” Justice Bhuyan said they reveal how far society remains from the benchmark of constitutional morality even 75 years into the Republic. He observed that while the Constitution lays down standards of equality and dignity, the morality practised within homes and communities often diverges sharply from those values.
He emphasised that constitutional morality requires governance through the rule of law rather than the rule of popular opinion. Referring to the evolution of the doctrine through judicial decisions, he cited Naz Foundation v Union of India, in which the Delhi High Court read down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, holding that popular morality cannot restrict fundamental rights under Article 21. Though the judgment was later overturned in Suresh Kumar Koushal v Naz Foundation, the Supreme Court ultimately restored and expanded the principle in Navtej Singh Johar v Union of India, affirming that constitutional morality must prevail over majoritarian views.
“In our constitutional scheme, it is the constitutionality of the issue before the court that is relevant, not the dominant or popular view,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also addressed the functioning of the district judiciary, underlining that trial courts are the first point of contact for most litigants and form the foundation of the justice delivery system. He stressed that due importance must be given to the recording of evidence and adjudication of bail matters.
Highlighting the role of High Courts, he said their supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution is intended as a shield to correct grave jurisdictional errors, not as a mechanism to substitute the discretion or factual appreciation of trial judges.
He recalled that several distinguished judges, including Justice H R Khanna, Justice A M Ahmadi, and Justice Fathima Beevi, began their careers in the district judiciary.
On representation within the judicial system, Justice Bhuyan noted that Telangana has made significant strides in gender inclusion. Out of a sanctioned strength of 655 judicial officers in the Telangana Judicial Service, 478 are currently serving, of whom 283 are women, exceeding 50 per cent representation. He added that members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, minority communities, and persons with disabilities are also represented in the state’s judiciary.
He observed that greater representation of women, marginalised communities, persons with disabilities, and sexual minorities would help make the judiciary more inclusive and reflective of India’s diversity. “The judiciary must represent all the colours of the rainbow and become a rainbow institution,” he said.
Justice Bhuyan also referred to the recent restoration by the Supreme Court of the requirement of a minimum three years of practice at the Bar for entry-level judicial posts. While acknowledging that the requirement ensures practical exposure, he cautioned that its impact on women aspirants, especially those from rural or small-town backgrounds facing social and financial constraints, would need to be carefully observed over time.
Concluding his address, he reiterated that the justice system must strive to bridge the gap between constitutional ideals and lived realities, ensuring that the rule of law remains paramount.
