BENCH COMPRISING OF JUSTICE D.A DESAI, JUSTICE RB MISRA This case revolves around the question of circumstantial evidence and the burden of proof in criminal law. The appellant, Dudh Nath Pandey, was convicted for the murder of his cousin, Ram Prakash Pandey. The conviction was based on circumstantial evidence, and the Supreme Court was called upon to address key issues of admissibility and sufficiency of such evidence to uphold the conviction. FACTS Ram Prakash Pandey was killed on the night....
Read MoreBench CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala The Supreme Court in Case Just rights for children alliance Vs S. Harish, a bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala addressed critical issues concerning the possession and consumption of child sexual exploitative and abuse material (CSEAM) under Indian law. The Court's judgment clarified the legal interpretations of relevant provisions in the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, and the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000, emphasizing the stringent....
Read MoreThe petitioners challenged the validity of Article 323A of the Constitution, which was added by the 42nd Amendment in 1976. This article excluded the High Courts' jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 in service-related matters. Additionally, they contested Sections 4, 5, 6, and 28 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. These sections laid out the qualifications and appointment procedures for the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Administrative Tribunal. The case focused on two key issues: Whether removing the High Courts’....
Read MoreIn India, the death penalty is a highly debated topic, with some advocating for its complete abolition and others supporting its retention. Indian courts have generally upheld the validity of the death penalty but emphasize the need for fair and judicious use of the discretionary power granted to them. While courts strive to follow consistent principles in such cases, the application of these guidelines remains a critical challenge. The case of Machi Singh v. State of Punjab is significant as....
Read MoreIn this case, child labourers in the construction sector of Delhi filed a complaint, claiming that Article 24 of the constitution which prohibits assigning children under the age of 14 to hazardous jobs had been violated. Additionally, representatives of construction companies employed workers from impoverished areas in Orissa, Bihar, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, and Rajasthan to work on the stadiums and infrastructure, including as flyovers and hotels, on the ASIAD-82 sites. Facts of the Case During the ASIAD-82....
Read MoreBENCH: HON’BLE JUSTICE "ARIJIT PASAYAT" & JUSTICE S.H KAPADIA INTRODUCTION - The process of granting a pardon in India begins with the submission of a mercy petition to the President under Article 72 of the Constitution. The petition is initially reviewed by the Home Ministry, which consults with the relevant state government. Following the Home Minister's recommendations, the petition is forwarded to the President for consideration. The authority to grant pardons is an integral part of the constitutional framework. Article....
Read MoreThe landmark case of Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India underscores the fundamental right of the right to freedom of speech and expression in a democratic society. In August 2019, the government imposed restrictions on communication networks, including internet and mobile services, in Jammu and Kashmir. This case represents a pivotal moment in Indian constitutional law, as the Supreme Court reaffirmed the essential role of constitutional rights and clarified the limits of governmental authority in restricting fundamental freedoms. Facts The....
Read MoreGiven federalism and the balance of power between the Union and State governments, this case is significant in Indian constitutional law because it discusses the extent and bounds of the President's authority under Article 356. Following the general elections in 1977, it investigates the constitutionality of the Central Government's orders to dissolve state legislatures and the subjectivity of the President's satisfaction under Article 356 to judicial scrutiny. Although the President's pleasure is subjective and often not susceptible to judicial review,....
Read MoreToday, every Indian citizen has a right to basic education, which is necessary for a decent life, due to the right to education, under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. This clause arose from the need to expound the right to life by giving it a meaning which includes education as a means of effectively realizing the other rights. In the leading case of Mohini Jain v. State of Karnataka, where the Supreme Court of India has given much importance....
Read MoreFacts of the case This case involves three appeals stemming from Right to Information (RTI) applications filed by the respondent, Subhash Chandra Agarwal, with the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) of the Supreme Court of India. These RTI applications sought: First Application: Information on communications between the Chief Justice of India and the Union Minister, alleging undue influence over judicial decisions. Second Application: Correspondence related to the appointments of Justices H.L. Dutta, A.K. Ganguly, and R.M. Lodha, who were elevated....
Read More
