Search Results

Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow Introduction In a democratic country like India, The supporters of the petitions argue that as India already decriminalized homosexual relationships in So, should India legalize same-sex marriages or not? Violative of Article 19 Further, Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India guarantees all citizens (Para c. 87) In the case of NALSA v Union of India, recognition has been made that sex and gender are

Union of India[5] that executive should refrain from using its legislative power recklessly in a malafide Also, In Union of India Vs. Union of India AIR SC 1918 (1994). [2] Dr. Pradeep Jain Etc Vs. Union Of India And Ors. Union of India AIR SC 710 (1982). [6] I.T.C. Ltd. Vs. State of Karnataka & Ors. AIR Kant 330 (2005). [7]Union of India Vs. Shri Harbhajan Singh Dhillon AIR SC 1061 (1972).

year law student at Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Punjab Background The Supreme Court of India The statistics of both courts, raise grave concerns about the diversity and inclusivity of the Indian The Indian higher judiciary, which essentially serves as the gatekeeper for upholding the principles In his dissenting judgment in Naresh v. Kraemer, 334 US 1 (1948); Budhan v.

Certificate Course in Learning Mediation BCC-SVI: Basic Certificate Course in Starting New Ventures  in India like IIPA, ILI, ISTM, IILM etc., and other renowned institutions of higher education and learning in India Sabha Secretariats Officers (in-service/ superannuated) usually not below the rank of Director from Union Officers (in-service/ superannuated) usually not below the rank of Director from Election Commission of India , Comptroller-General of India, etc.

Abstract When our pen starts running, we must write with great satisfaction that India enjoys the position Democratic nation in the world and has been given some fundamental rights under the constitution of India In the Judgment of Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan vs Union of India, the Hon’ble Supreme Court says that most primitive natural justice and procedural safeguards, This decision by the Supreme Court in the Union of India vs.

Concept of Live-in Relationship The concept of a live-in relationship came to India in recent times. Live-in relation is considered in India as an outcome of modernization but it is not completely true. Live-In Relationship in India The concept of live-in relationships has spread throughout the whole world In India, there are 11 fundamental rights. Article 21 is one of them. the view that a live-in relationship is a personal choice of a person and also the constitution of India

her marriage[5]; A child born out of the live-in relationship is entitled to maintenance under the Indian This can also be challenged under Article 32 of the Indian constitution. both are to be considered equal in the eyes of law would amount to a violation of Article 14 of the Indian Article 300A of the Indian Constitution speaks about the right to property where it says “No person shall It is to be noted that the Indian society is moving from the patriarchal structure to modern legal structure

The media has brought the Indian Judiciary under its scanner. In Attorney General v. convicted Santosh Singh, the father of deceased, Chaman Lal Mattoo, the woman’s father, wrote in the Indian Union of India[14], where journalist Sheela Barse was highly praised for her work in the field of juvenile on 13.05.2020). [8] 1997 (8) SCC 386 [9] (1981) 3 All ER 161 [10] 2007 Cri LJ 964 [11]Palash Kumar, India

Abstract Article 13 is comprised in Part III of the Indian Constitution headed under Fundamental Rights Introduction The Indian Constitution when adopted was criticized as a bag of borrowing, even though the The drafting committee gave the concept of fundamental Rights in Part III of the Indian Constitution The article 13 not only asserts the supremacy of Indian Constitution but also makes ways for judicial Conclusion Indian Constitution promises that “to no one should right and justice be delayed, sold or

Authored by Raj Krishna* & Sagarika Swapnil** On May 18, 2022, a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India The Indian Apex Court invoked Article 142 of the Constitution and ruled that there has been an inordinate It is pertinent to note that in the year 2014, the Supreme Court of India commuted the death sentence term on the ground that there has been an eleven years delay in deciding their mercy petition by the Union this judgment, has reaffirmed the fact that the right to seek mercy under Articles 72 or 161 of the Indian

state, AIR 1990 SC 709 (India) [5] Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration, AIR 1978 SC 1575 (India). [6] Ibid [7] U.P vs. [8] ibid [9] Saheli v. commissioner of police, AIR 1990 (1) SCJ 390, (India). [11] Selvi and Others v State of Karnataka AIR 2010 SC 1974 (India). [12] Ibid [13] Haricharan v State of Madhya Pradesh (2011) 3 SCR 769, (India). [14] Dr.

AIMPLB has lately abstained from responding to the Law Commission of India's inquiry, indicating their For example, In India, Christians are subject to the Cochin Christian Succession Act 1921, the Indian Additionally, the Muslim Shia community recognizes mutta marriages, which are transient unions. Women face discrimination in India based on their religion. [7] The Constitution is the highest law in India, a secular nation.