Issues.- Whether Article 31C (as upheld in Kesavananda Bharati) survives in the Constitution after the amendment to the provision by the forty-second amendment was struck down by this Court in Minerva Mills. Whether the interpretation of Article 39(b) adopted by Justice Krishna Iyer in Ranganatha Reddy and followed in Sanjeev Coke must be reconsidered. Whether the phrase ‘material resources of the community’ in Article 39(b) can be interpreted to include resources that are owned privately and not by the state.....
Read MoreIntroduction The K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India case, also known as the Aadhaar judgment, stands as a landmark ruling by the Supreme Court of India on the right to privacy and the constitutionality of the Aadhaar scheme. Delivered on September 26, 2018, the judgment has had far-reaching implications for individual privacy rights, data security, and the interaction between state powers and personal freedoms in India. Background of the Case The Aadhaar project, initiated in 2009 by the Unique....
Read MoreAnti-Foreigners Agitation in Assam (1979–1985).- Led by the All Assam Students’ Union (AASU) and All Assam Gana Sangram Parishad (AAGSP). The movement demanded.- identification and deportation of illegal migrants protection of Assamese cultural and political identity. Key Causes of the Assam Movement.- Illegal Immigration: The large influx changed the demographics of Assam, creating fears among the local Assamese population about losing their cultural and linguistic identity, as well as concerns over employment and resources. Electoral Manipulation: Illegal immigrants were....
Read MoreIntroduction The Supreme Court of India’s judgement in Supriyo v. Union of India is a landmark ruling with significant implications for constitutional interpretation, individual rights, and legislative limitations. This case focused on the constitutionality of a particular legal provision, addressing fundamental rights and the balance between state powers and personal liberties. Background of the Case The case of Supriyo v. Union of India emerged out of the petitioner Supriyo Chakraborty's challenge to the application of certain provisions of Indian law....
Read MoreIntroduction R v. Dudley and Stephens (1884) is one of the most famous and controversial cases in English criminal law. This landmark case involved the grim reality of survival cannibalism at sea and brought to light the legal principle that necessity cannot be a defence to a charge of murder. The ruling set a precedent in criminal law regarding the limits of necessity as a defence. Background of the Case In 1884, four sailors—Thomas Dudley, Edward Stephens, Brooks,....
Read MoreSukanya Shantha vs Union of India (2024) is a landmark Supreme Court case addressing caste-based discrimination in Indian prisons. The case, filed by journalist Sukanya Shantha, was triggered by her investigative article that exposed how prison manuals in various Indian states allowed for practices perpetuating caste hierarchies. She sought to challenge these discriminatory practices, which violated the fundamental rights of equality and dignity enshrined in the Constitution. Background and Facts Sukanya Shantha, in her article titled “From Segregation to....
Read MoreIntroduction: Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India is a landmark case in Indian jurisprudence, where the Supreme Court decriminalized consensual homosexual relations, marking a significant victory for LGBTQ+ rights. The case challenged Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), a colonial-era law that criminalized "carnal intercourse against the order of nature," effectively making homosexual acts illegal. This judgment overruled previous rulings and upheld the principles of equality, dignity, and privacy under the Constitution of India. Background of....
Read MoreIn a recent development, the Supreme Court of India has rejected a petition seeking to reduce the duration of the Bachelor of Laws (LLB) program from five years to three years. The petition was filed by a group of students who argued that the current five-year program is too long and financially burdensome, especially for women whose careers are often delayed due to societal pressures to marry. Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, heading the bench that dismissed the petition, expressed concerns....
Read MoreMohd. Ahmed khan v. Shah bano begum AIR 1985 SC 945 BENCH Justice Y. V. Chandrachud, Rangath Misra, Justice D. A. Desai, Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy, Justice E. S. Venkataramiah FACTS In 1972, Shah Bano, a Muslim woman, was married to Mohammed Ahmad Khan, an affluent and well-known advocate in Indore, Madhya Pradesh, and had five children from the wedlock. After 14 years, Ahmad Khan took a younger woman as second wife and after years of living with both wives,....
Read MoreAIR 1997 SC 610 Custody means restricting anyone's freedom of movement. The fundamental right to move freely can be taken by the procedure established by law. In India, the person's fundamental right to move can be restricted legally either by the way of judicial or police custody. The object behind either of custody is to prevent the person so taken into the custody from further committing an offence or tampering of evidences or threatening of the witnesses etc. The prima....
Read More
