Search Results

Union of India The Supreme Court stated that triple talaq was declared unconstitutional, and it emphasised Union of India and others The court, in this case, stated that the right to privacy is protected as an Union of India , 2018, the bench of 5 judges constituted in this landmark case where the Supreme Court Union of India , a bench of 5 judges was constituted where the court stated that there is no fundamental Decisions in instances such as Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India  and Joseph Shine v.

[i] The Hon’ble Supreme Court’s judgment in the case of Shreya Singhal v. Union of India [ii] is a landmark judgment that has reiterated the intent of the constituent assembly The instant case is a writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India pleading that Supreme Court and even discussed the American Jurisprudence to distinguish the notion of liberty in India Union of India, W.P. (Crl.) 167/2012: 2015 SCC Online SC 248.

Union of India , which mandates clear guidelines when imposing restrictions upon freedom of speech and Rangarajan v. P Jagjivan Ram [2] . Ultimately, the evolving landscape of freedom of speech and expression in India requires careful consideration References [1]  Shreya Singhal v. Union of India AIR 2015 SC 1523. [2]  S. Rangarajan v. P. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1.

[i] In the case of Indian Express (Bombay) Private Limited v. Union of India [ii] the Supreme Court has held that freedom of speech and expression is subject to reasonable Union of India, [iv] it was held that freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19 ( Union of India [xii] , wherein the Court explicitly held that fundamental freedoms under Article 19 are [xii] Express Newspaper (P) Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1958 SC 578. [xiii] S. Khushboo v.

Authored by Kunal Parihar, a 3rd-year law student at National Law School of India University, Bangalore Union of India, the petitioners challenged the constitutional validity of a 2023 amendment to the Information Government or its authorised officers to block public access to any information in the interest of India's In ADR v. Union of India, the Supreme Court ruled that legitimate expectations can only be overridden in the public

Union of India  (the judgment). Union of India , wherein the petition contested the non-alignment of the appointment of ECs, before the In  Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Union of India  (page 623 para 10) strongly stressed the autonomy of ECI, “In order to ensure the purity Union of India .  

Union of India. Gavai in the case of Anuradha Bhasin v Union of India and Ors held that “an indefinite suspension of Constitution that recognizes Jammu and Kashmir as an integral part of the Union of India. [iv] Bhasin v Union of India, Global Freedom of Expression (November 25, 2020, 7:00 p.m.), https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu /cases/bhasin-v-union-of-india/ [v] Anuradha Bhasin v.

Union of India  denied this right to fundamental status, raising concerns about its potential impact The recent Supreme Court decision in Supriyo Chakraborty v. Union of India  reignited the debate. Union of India  of 2006, where the Supreme Court affirmed the freedom to choose one’s spouse regardless Union of India , underscored the inherent dignity in the ability of individuals to make their own choices Union of India  dealt specifically with the denial of marriage registration to a same-sex couple.

far-fetched to reach the view that most DMs are going to be Hindu, considering the demography of Bihar and India The landmark cases of Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India  and Joseph Shine v. Union of India  established that pre-constitutional laws do not have a presumption of constitutionality community is an anomaly, and no similar law exists for Hindus or for the followers of any other religion in India unfair treatment being meted out to the Buddhists as envisaged in the case of State of West Bengal v.

Introduction The relation between Union and States is a very important topic in the constitution of India In Indian constitution the relation between union and state has been defined under three heads namely 1950, art 249 and 250 [4] Constitution of India 1950, art 263 [5] Constitution of India 1950, art 265 Gopalan v. State of Madras (1958) 2 MLJ 117 [7] Constitution of India 1950 art 298 A [8] ITO v. of India 1950, art 285

However, the Supreme Court in Supriyo Chakraborty v Union of India  held that there is no fundamental Union of India & Ors ” was the first attempt to formally recognise their gender and the basic rights Union of India & Ors. " This judgement ended the discrimination against them by the state and society Decided Case on Same-Sex Marriage in India Supriyo Chakraborty v. India can learn from their mistakes and move in the direction of a similar stance on same-sex unions.

year and 3rd year students at DNLU, Jabalpur respectively The Supreme Court in the case of Supriyo v Union of India, wherein the court, with a majority of 3:2, declined the case of Petitioner of granting Shine, Lt. References [1] Sudhir Krishnaswamy, Democracy and Constitutionalism in India: A Study of the Basic Structure Sushma v Commissioner of Police [2023] W.M.P. No. 31112 (W.P.