Orissa High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

“While the guideline aims to protect judicial officers from unwarranted harassment, it does not eliminate the possibility of addressing genuine issues faced by individuals or communities due to the actions of a judicial officer. The High Court retains the responsibility to ascertain the authenticity of the complaints and take appropriate action based on verified facts.”

Continue reading
detention orders under COFEPOSA
Case BriefsSupreme Court

The question of law which revolved around right of making representation being seriously jeopardized as detenus were supplied with various documents as parts of relied upon documents (‘RUDs’) which are illegible, incomplete and not readable violating Article 22 (5) of the Constitution of India read with Section 3 (3) of COFEPOSA Act, was kept open.

Continue reading
quash NDPS case
Case BriefsSupreme Court

The investigation against the accused was initiated as the main accused had named him but later it was discovered that it was a false accusation, as wife of the main accused had some disputes going on with accused person’s wife, hence, he was falsely implicated.

Continue reading
SC stays custody to father
Case BriefsSupreme Court

The mother in her undertaking stated that she got a job in Consulate General of India’s office at San Francisco, and that she had applied for US citizenship and duly attended for interview. She had also undertaken to ensure the admission of her son in a good school, co-operation with father and facilitation of visits to son.

Continue reading
Sub-classification of SCSTs (2)
Case BriefsSupreme Court (Constitution/Larger Benches)

“State has neither executive nor legislative power to sub-classify or sub-divide or re-group the castes, races or tribes specified as the “Scheduled Castes” in the Presidential List notified under Article 341. Under the guise of providing reservation or under the pretext of taking affirmative action for the weaker of the weakest sections of the society, the State cannot vary, nor tinker the Presidential List.”

Continue reading
sub-classification of SCSTs
Case BriefsSupreme Court (Constitution/Larger Benches)

“Article 341 does not create an integrated homogenous class. Sub-classification within the Scheduled Castes does not violate Article 341(2) because the castes are not per se included in or excluded from the List.”

Continue reading
Maharashtra Slum Areas Act
Case BriefsSupreme Court

“Legal reform through legislative correction improves the legal system and it would require assessment of the working of the law, its accessibility, utility and abuse as well. Executive branch has a constitutional duty to ensure that the purpose and object of a statute is accomplished while implementing it, along with duty to closely monitor the working of a statute and must have a continuous and a real time assessment of the impact that the statute is having.”

Continue reading
Sub-classification of SCSTs
Hot Off The PressNews

In E.V. Chinnaiah v. State of A.P., (2005) 1 SCC 394, the Supreme Court five Judge Bench held that Scheduled Castes form homogenous classes and there cannot be any sub-division, and that such sub-classification of SC/STs is contrary to Article 341 of the Constitution.

Continue reading
Supreme Court Roundup July 2024
Legal RoundUpSupreme Court Roundups

July, just after the summer break, was the month of ground-breaking and landmark decisions. From long arguments on NEET-UG 2024 scam to landmark decisions on genetically modified crops, guidelines on portrayal of persons with disabilities in visual media, films, and maintainability of WB’s suit against misuse of CBI, this roundup revisits it all.

Continue reading