WELCOME TO AASHAYEIN LAW EDUCATION CENTER

20 May 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

Kushal Rao v. The State of Bombay, 1958 AIR 22

This case arose out of a fight between two rival groups. According to the prosecution, the appellant, Khushal, along with others, attacked Baboolal (the victim) using swords and spears, causing multiple injuries. The attack happened around 9 PM in a narrow street in Nagpur. Baboolal later died from the injuries. Soon after the incident, three dying declarations were recorded first by the attending doctor at the hospital, second by a police sub-inspector, and third by a First-Class Magistrate. Based on....

Read More
19 May 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

Tweddle v Atkinson: Rule of privity of Contract

In this case, William Tweddle brought a lawsuit to enforce a contract made between his father, John Tweddle, and his father-in-law, William Guy. Before William's marriage to Guy’s daughter, both fathers had agreed to provide a financial settlement as part of the marriage arrangement. To formalize this, they entered into a written agreement on July 11, 1855, in which Guy agreed to pay £200 and John Tweddle agreed to pay £100 to William. The contract also mentioned that William Tweddle....

Read More
16 May 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

Basdev v. The State of Pepsu (1956)

Basdev, a retired military Jamadar from Harigarh, went to a wedding in another village where people were drinking heavily. He got very drunk and, during the midday meal at the bride’s house, wanted to sit in a better spot. A teenage boy named Maghar Singh, about 15 or 16 years old, was already sitting there and refused to give up his seat. In response, Basdev pulled out a pistol and shot the boy in the stomach, killing him on the....

Read More
16 May 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

State of Maharashtra v. M.H. George (AIR 1965 SC 722)

Mayer Hans George, a German national, was caught smuggling gold. On 27th November 1962, he flew from Zurich to Manila with 34 kg of gold hidden in a specially-made jacket with 28 compartments. He never left the aircraft during a stop in Bombay on 28th November. Indian Customs searched the plane and found the gold on him. George was arrested and convicted by the Bombay Presidency Magistrate, receiving a one-year rigorous imprisonment sentence. However, the Bombay High Court later acquitted....

Read More
16 May 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

Deo Narayan v. State of Uttar Pradesh (1973 AIR 473)

The case involves a fight over the ownership and use of land in the village of Baruara, in Ghazipur district, Uttar Pradesh. On September 17, 1965, a serious clash happened between two rival groups. Chandan Rama, along with a few others, tried to stop Deo Narayan from farming on a piece of land they both claimed. During the confrontation, things turned violent. Chandan Rama hit Deo Narayan on the head with a lathi (a wooden stick). In response, Deo Narayan....

Read More
16 May 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

Defense of Insanity: R v. M'Naghten (1843)

In January 1843, Daniel M’Naghten shot Edward Drummond, mistakenly believing he was the Prime Minister. Drummond died five days later, and M’Naghten was charged with murder. He pleaded not guilty due to insanity. At trial, medical experts and witnesses testified that M’Naghten was suffering from severe delusions that made him lose control over his actions. The court heard that while he might have seemed sane otherwise, his delusions led to the fatal shooting. Issue before the Court Can a person....

Read More
07 May 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

NALSA vs Union of India (2014)

The National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) filed a public interest litigation before the Supreme Court of India to represent the rights of the transgender community. NALSA highlighted that transgender persons, despite being a part of Indian society for centuries, have been continuously discriminated against and excluded from social and legal recognition. The petition emphasized that transgender people face severe marginalization in key areas such as education, jobs, healthcare, and housing. This lack of recognition and support has caused significant hardship....

Read More
07 May 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

Joginder Kumar vs State Of U.P (1994)

In this case, the petitioner, Joginder Kumar, was called to the office of the Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP), Ghaziabad (Respondent No. 4) on January 7, 1994, for questioning in connection with a certain case. Joginder appeared at the SSP's office around 10:00 AM, accompanied by his four brothers. However, once he arrived, the SSP kept him in custody. When his brothers later asked about his whereabouts, they were told that Joginder would be released the same evening after the....

Read More
07 May 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

R vs Foster

In the case of R v Foster, a witness saw a vehicle driving at high speed in the direction of the victim but did not actually see the moment of the accident. After the accident occurred, the victim who was visibly in shock spoke to the witness and described what had happened. Issue Before the Court The main legal issue in this case was whether the victim’s statement, made shortly after the accident while still in a state of shock,....

Read More
05 May 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

Murli S. Deora v. Union of India, (2001)

In 1999, Murli S. Deora, a well-known Indian human rights activist, filed a civil writ petition before the Supreme Court of India under Article 32 of the Constitution. It was a public interest litigation (PIL) aimed at banning smoking in public places. The main argument made by the petitioner was that smoking in public seriously harmed public health and violated the right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. Murli S. Deora highlighted that non-smokers....

Read More