Introduction 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 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 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 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 MoreAIR 1973 SC 1461 Background of the Case The events which are leading to Kesavananda Bharti's case dates back to 1951. Soon after the enforcement of the Constitution, the question was prevalent regarding the extent of amending powers of the Constitution. The prominent question in all the following cases was that whether fundamental rights are amendable and whether the word 'law' under Article 13 includes the amending law. For the first time, the said question was raised in the case....
Read MoreDR. HARISH KUMAR KHURANA vs. JOGINDER SINGH AND ORS. 2021 Medical Negligence is basically the combination of two words i.e. medical and negligence. Negligence means absence of due care and caution; when the medical practitioner fails to exercise due care and caution it is called medical negligence. Medical negligence is primarily an offence under Consumer Protection Act and Indian Penal Code. Under the Consumer Protection Act, the doctor is considered as the expert in his field and patients are his....
Read MoreMOHORI BIBEE Vs. DHARMODAS GHOSE ILR (1903) 30 CAL 539 (PC) The Section 2(h) of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 defines contracts as an agreement enforceable by law. The contracts cannot be entered into by any person; the competency regarding the same has been laid down under Section 11 of the Act. The Section 11 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 states that the person of age of majority, sound mind and not disqualified by law are competent to contract.....
Read MoreREVOLUTIONARY STEP OF KERALA HIGH COURT: MARITAL RAPE A GROUND FOR DIVORCE In India, law doesn't recognise marital rape. Marital rape means a forceful intercourse with the spouse. The Indian Penal Code penalises rape but it fails to recognise non-consensual sex within marriage. However, the Supreme Court of India in the case of Independent Thought v. Union of India 2017 partially penalised marital rape by deciding that forceful sexual intercourse with a wife between the 15years of age to 18years....
Read MoreCARLIL Vs. CARBOLIC SMOKE BALL COMPANY (1893) 1 Q.B. 256 In our day to day lives most of the relationships are governed by the agreements. The agreements which are enforceable by law are contracts. However, to constitute any agreement the foremost requirement is the offer and its acceptance. The offer is constituted when there is a proposal by one i.e. the willingness to do or abstain to do something with an intention of obtaining assent of the other party. Although,....
Read More
