Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
HIV/AIDS patients have a right of equal treatment everywhere and they cannot be denied job opportunity or discriminated against in employment matters.
Due to non-payment of salary and non-consideration of petitioner’s representation for four years, all of his family members had suffered mentally and financially.
Awareness has to be created in young minds not just from the point of view of emotional and societal pressures that Live -in relationships may create, but also from the perspective that it could give rise to various legal hassles.
The Lawyers being homogeneous class, further creating divisions on any criteria including economic status or otherwise will result in losing faith and ordinary Lawyers will get frustrated, resulting young and talented Lawyers leaving the profession. It is the primary duty of the Judicial Institutions to provide a conducive atmosphere for all the practicing Lawyers enabling them to have utmost trust in the Judicial System.
Tracing the development of LGBTQ+ rights in India with the help of statutory provisions and notable judgments by Supreme Court and Indian High Courts.
The apprehension expressed by the petitioner is that the telecast of film without adhering to the constitutional and statutory safeguards may result in injuring the public order and thereby the sovereignty and integrity of India
Consumption of dog meat is a regarded custom amongst the Nagas since times immemorial and the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 already provides for an appropriate authority to issue prohibition orders.
In a suit instituted by the Hindu worshippers to secure their right to darshan and pooja of deities Virajman within the premises of the Gyanvapi Mosque Complex, the Allahabad High Court said that merely seeking right to worship Hindu deities does not change the Mosque’s character into a Temple.
Supreme Court held that the power of the Governor under Clause 5 of the Fifth Schedule does not supersede the Fundamental Rights under Part III of the Constitution of India.
Supreme Court said that the State Government may examine the data of last few years, to come to a realistic finding as to what should be the extent of these reservations. A wholesale reservation is not serving any purpose, rather it frustrates the very purpose of the reservation
“The prime concern and endeavour of law should be to secure justice on the basis of truth, which ought to be unearthed through a committed and competent investigating agency.” observes the Court.
Here is snippet on the evolution of ‘Doctrine of Basic Structure' in the Independent India and how the biggest legal battle continued between the Judiciary and the Legislature, as the landmark case of Kesavananda Bharati v State of Kerela (1973) 4 SCC 225 enters its Golden Jubilee year.
Constitution of India — Arts. 19(1)(a) & (2) and Pt. III, Preamble & Art. 51-A — Right to freedom of speech and
Madras High Court said that whether it is contractual employment, temporary engagements or otherwise, the procedure to be adopted by Banks must be transparent and in compliance with the mandates of the Constitution.
Supreme Court said that a stand of whichever court, cannot be allowed to stand, if it is in ignorance of constitutional provisions
“If there is a denial of a fundamental right under Part III of the Constitution or there is a jurisdictional error or error apparent on the face of the record, the High Court can exercise its jurisdiction”, stated the Supreme Court
Supreme Court said that the object and purpose of the enactment of UAPA is to provide for more effective prevention of certain unlawful activities. To punish such a person who is continued as a member of such unlawful association which is declared unlawful due to unlawful activities can be said to be in furtherance of providing for effective prevention of the unlawful activities.
Supreme Court’s full bench declared the judgments in Arup Bhuyan, Indra Das and Raneef to be bad in law. Also, the High Courts Judgments which followed these precedents were overruled
The Tribunal observed that the act of filling in 2 applications for one and the same post in more than one Unit cannot be accepted to be an inadvertent or innocent act.
With a ratio of 3:2, the Supreme Court of Kenya delivered a significant decision by holding that it would be unconstitutional to limit the right to form association purely based on sexual orientation.