scheduled tribes

Constitutional Bench 2024 roundup
Legal RoundUpSupreme Court Roundups

The Supreme Court’s 2024 decisions have marked a significant turning point in the country’s legal and constitutional framework. Key rulings delivered by Constitutional Benches on Electoral bonds, private property, royalty as tax, AMU’s minority status, sub-classification within reserved categories, etc. have left an impact on fundamental rights, political transparency and tax regime, shaping India’s socio-political landscape, influencing both public policy and the broader democratic process.

Jharkhand High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

In the present case, the petitioner has helped one lady against the allegation of incumbent sitting Chief Minister, which clearly suggests that maliciously the case was registered against the petitioner and the investigation was also made with pre-occupied mind.

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.”

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.”

Patna High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

The Court noted that after the collection of data for Caste survey, there was a frog leap into the amendment enhancing the reservations beyond 50%, which was on proportionate representation in the services of the State and educational institutions, which was clearly not permissible under Articles 15(4) and 16(4).

caste based insult
Case BriefsSupreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that it is desirable that before an accused is subjected to a trial for alleged commission of offence under section 3(1)(x), the utterances made by him in any place within public view are outlined, if not in the F.I.R., but at least in the charge-sheet so as to enable the court to ascertain whether the charge sheet makes out a case of an offence.