Fundamental Rights

Supreme Court Limits State Residency Quota in B.Ed Admissions: Veena Vadini Teachers Training Institute vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (28 April 2023)

/ Admission Policy, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Dinesh Maheshwari, Education Law, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Reservation Policy, Sudhanshu Dhulia

Supreme Court Limits State Residency Quota in B.Ed Admissions: Veena Vadini Teachers Training Institute vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a state government can reserve seats for residents in B.Ed courses and, if so, what is the permissible extent of such reservation. CASE TYPE: Education Law. Case Name: Veena Vadini Teachers Training […]

Supreme Court Limits State Residency Quota in B.Ed Admissions: Veena Vadini Teachers Training Institute vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (28 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC: Ritu Chhabaria vs. Union of India (26 April 2023)

/ C. T. Ravikumar, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 167(2), Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 309(2), Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Default Bail, Fundamental Rights, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120(B), Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 420, Judges, Krishna Murari

Supreme Court Clarifies Default Bail Rights: Ritu Chhabaria vs. Union of India (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a chargesheet filed without completing the investigation extinguishes the right to default bail. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, specifically relating to default bail. Case Name: Ritu Chhabaria vs. Union of India & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 26 April 2023 Date of

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC: Ritu Chhabaria vs. Union of India (26 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Pay Scales Based on Qualifications: State of Gujarat vs. Dr. P.A. Bhatt (26 April 2023)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 174, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 176, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Equal Pay for Equal Work, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Pankaj Mithal, Pay Scales, Service Law, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Pay Scales Based on Qualifications: State of Gujarat vs. Dr. P.A. Bhatt (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether different pay scales can be fixed for officers of the same cadre based on their educational qualifications, and whether Allopathic and AYUSH doctors are entitled to equal pay. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: State

Supreme Court Upholds Differential Pay Scales Based on Qualifications: State of Gujarat vs. Dr. P.A. Bhatt (26 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction Due to Missing Trial Records: Jitendra Kumar Rode vs. Union of India (24 April 2023)

/ Appellate Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 385, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Krishna Murari, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 7, Sanjay Karol

Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction Due to Missing Trial Records: Jitendra Kumar Rode vs. Union of India (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a conviction can be upheld by an appellate court when the trial court records are unavailable. CASE TYPE: Criminal Appeal Case Name: Jitendra Kumar Rode vs. Union of India Judgment Date: 24 April 2023

Supreme Court Sets Aside Conviction Due to Missing Trial Records: Jitendra Kumar Rode vs. Union of India (24 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court sets aside conviction due to missing trial records in corruption case: Jitendra Kumar Rode vs. Union of India (2023)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 385, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Krishna Murari, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13(1), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13(2), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 7, Sanjay Karol

Supreme Court sets aside conviction due to missing trial records in corruption case: Jitendra Kumar Rode vs. Union of India (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a conviction can be upheld when the trial court records are missing. CASE TYPE: Criminal Appeal, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Case Name: Jitendra Kumar Rode vs. Union of India Judgment

Supreme Court sets aside conviction due to missing trial records in corruption case: Jitendra Kumar Rode vs. Union of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Quashes Discretionary Allotment of Land: Improvement Trust, Ropar vs. Shashi Bala (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Land Allotment, Land Law, Punjab Town Improvement (Utilization of Land and Allotment of Plots) Rules, 1983, Sanjay Kumar, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Quashes Discretionary Allotment of Land: Improvement Trust, Ropar vs. Shashi Bala (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a land allotment made under a discretionary quota can be upheld if the discretionary quota itself is deemed unconstitutional. CASE TYPE: Civil Law – Land Allotment Case Name: Improvement Trust, Ropar vs. Shashi Bala & Anr. Judgment Date:

Supreme Court Quashes Discretionary Allotment of Land: Improvement Trust, Ropar vs. Shashi Bala (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Grants Bail in UAPA Case Citing Lack of Prima Facie Evidence: Yedala Subba Rao vs. Union of India (2023) INSC 349

/ Abhay S. Oka, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Fundamental Rights, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 25, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 27, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences related to terrorist acts, Rajesh Bindal, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 with Section 43D

Supreme Court Grants Bail in UAPA Case Citing Lack of Prima Facie Evidence: Yedala Subba Rao vs. Union of India (2023) INSC 349 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the accused should be granted bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) when there is a lack of prima facie evidence. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Yedala

Supreme Court Grants Bail in UAPA Case Citing Lack of Prima Facie Evidence: Yedala Subba Rao vs. Union of India (2023) INSC 349 Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds State’s Power to Abolish Temporary Posts: Tamil Nadu Makkal Nala Paniyalargal Case (2023)

/ Abolition of Posts, Ajay Rastogi, Bela M. Trivedi, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 47, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005, MGNREGA with Section 2(n), MGNREGA with Section 3, MGNREGA with Section 4, Regularisation of Services, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds State’s Power to Abolish Temporary Posts: Tamil Nadu Makkal Nala Paniyalargal Case (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the State Government can abolish temporary posts created under a specific scheme and discontinue the services of those employed under the scheme. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: The Government of Tamil Nadu and Anr. Etc.

Supreme Court Upholds State’s Power to Abolish Temporary Posts: Tamil Nadu Makkal Nala Paniyalargal Case (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Procession, Dismisses State’s Appeal: K. Phanindra Reddy vs. G. Subramanian (2023)

/ Chennai City Police Act, 1888, Chennai City Police Act, 1888 with Section 41, Chennai City Police Act, 1888 with Section 41A, Constitutional Law, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Pankaj Mithal, Police Act, 1861, Police Act, 1861 with Section 30, Right to Assembly, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Procession, Dismisses State’s Appeal: K. Phanindra Reddy vs. G. Subramanian (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court can modify its original order in a contempt petition. Also, whether the State can deny permission for a procession based on law and order concerns. CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: K. Phanindra Reddy,

Supreme Court Upholds Right to Procession, Dismisses State’s Appeal: K. Phanindra Reddy vs. G. Subramanian (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court quashes detention order due to illegible documents: Pramod Singla vs. Union of India (2023)

/ COFEPOSA Act, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 22, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Krishna Murari, Preventive Detention Law, Preventive Detention Law with Detention Order, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Quashes Detention Order Due to Illegible Documents: Pramod Singla vs. Union of India (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a detention order can be quashed if the documents provided to the detainee are illegible and in a foreign language. CASE TYPE: Preventive Detention Law Case Name: Pramod Singla vs. Union of India & Ors. [Judgment

Supreme Court quashes detention order due to illegible documents: Pramod Singla vs. Union of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Quashes Detention Order Due to Illegible Documents and Upholds Rights of Detainees: Pramod Singla vs. Union of India (2023)

/ COFEPOSA Act, 1974, COFEPOSA Act, 1974 with Section 3, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 22(5), Fundamental Rights, Judges, Krishna Murari, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Quashes Detention Order Due to Illegible Documents and Upholds Rights of Detainees: Pramod Singla vs. Union of India (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a detention order can be quashed due to the supply of illegible documents to the detainee and whether the central government is bound to wait for the decision of the advisory

Supreme Court Quashes Detention Order Due to Illegible Documents and Upholds Rights of Detainees: Pramod Singla vs. Union of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Directs States to Adopt Guidelines to Prevent Unnecessary Hysterectomies (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Fundamental Rights, Healthcare Law, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges, Medical Malpractice, Public Interest Litigation, Women's Health Rights

Supreme Court Directs States to Adopt Guidelines to Prevent Unnecessary Hysterectomies (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Prevention of unnecessary hysterectomies and protection of women’s health rights. CASE TYPE: Public Interest Litigation concerning healthcare and women’s rights. Case Name: Dr. Narendra Gupta v. Union of India & Ors. [Judgment Date]: April 05, 2023 Introduction Date of the Judgment:

Supreme Court Directs States to Adopt Guidelines to Prevent Unnecessary Hysterectomies (2023) Read Post »

Scroll to Top