Author: Prasoon Shekhar, ICFAI University, Dehradun CASE: Kanhaiya Kumar v. State of NCT of Delhi CITATION: MANU/DE/0498/2016 COURT: The High Court of Delhi CASE NO.: Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 558/ 2016 & Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 3237/ 2016 & 3262/ 2016. PETITIONER: Kanhaiya Kumar RESPONDENT: State of NCT of Delhi BENCH: (J) Pratibha Rani DECIDED
Author: Meenakshi Raj, Bandhua Mukti Morcha v Union of India : Case Comment Bench: Bhagwati, P.N. Petitioner/Appellant: Bandhua Mukti Morcha Respondent: Union of India Year of Judgement: 1984 Facts: The petitioner (appellant), a social cause organization, approached the Supreme Court through a letter under Article 32 (i.e. to sought the issuance of a Writ of
Author: Mallika Kapoor, The Department of Law, Aligarh Muslim University CASE NAME: Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar, AIR 1962 SC 955 COURT: Hon’ble The Supreme Court of India JURISDICTION: Appellate (Criminal) CASE NO.: Cr. A. No. 445 of 1955 BENCH: Bhuvaneshwar Prasad Sinha, C.J., A.K. Sarkar, J.R. Madholkar, N. Rajagopala Ayyangar, and S.K.
CASE COMMENT ON ARUNA RAMCHNDRAN SHAUNBAGH V UOI Author: Ayushi Ranade, HPNLU Fundamental Rights are integral for a dignified and enjoyable life. Probably the most necessary Fundamental Right in the Indian Constitution is the Right to Life provided under Article 21. It is a right that encompasses inside its wide-area the proper to criminal aid,
INDIAN YOUNG LAWYERS ASSOCIATION V. THE STATE OF KERALA Author: Sankalpita Pal Case Details Court Name- Supreme Court of India Citation- (2019) 11 SCC 1; 2018 (8) SCJ 609 Decided On- 28.09.2018 Hon’ble Judges/Coram- JusticesDipak Misra, A.M. Khanwilkar, Rohinton Fali Nariman, Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra. Fact Matrix Backdrop of Sabarimala Temple Sabarimala Temple is
Mr. ‘X’ Vs. Hospital Z (1998) 8 SCC 296 Author: Yukti Gupta Coram- S. Saghir Ahmad and B.N. Kirpal, JJ. Decided on- September 21, 1998 Judgment Delivered by Justice S. Saghir Ahmad INTRODUCTION HIVAIDS is not just a medical problem, it affects social and economic development too. It has an impact on the legal order
Scope of ADR [Relevant Case laws] Author: Santoshi karasi Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc., [(2012) 9 SCC 552] In the landmark cases of Bhatia International and Venture Global Engineering, the Supreme Court had held that Part I of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 set out the procedures, award, interim relief
NAVTEJ SINGH JOHAR V. UNION OF INDIA Author: Aayush Akar, NLUO India was among Asia’s 28 countries in banning homosexuality and acknowledging LGBT rights. The decision passed in “Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India” has improved many people’s lives within the nation. The LGBT Community had no such rights before this decision as homosexuality was a
Apple V. Samsung Author: Santoshi karasi 2010: Apple had warned Samsung saying that it believes that the Korean company is infringing upon Apple patents. 2011: The patent battle started in 2011 when Apple alleged Samsung of “slavishly” copying the iPhone design. Samsung then countered the allegation by suing Apple accusing the company of infringing Samsung’s software patents. This went on
INDIAN EXPRESS PVT.LTD & ORS V. UNION OF INDIA Author: Preeti Singh Bhadoria, Lloyd Law College, Greater Noida BENCH- VENKATARAMIAH, E.S (J), REDDY, O. CHINNAPPA (J), SEN, A.P. (J) PETITIONER- INDIAN EXPRESS NEWSPAPER(BOMBAY) PRIVATE LTD.& ORS RESPONDENT- UNION OF INDIA Date of Judgment- 06/ 12/ 1984 Facts- The petitioners, in this case, were companies, employees,
Romesh Thappar V. The State of Madras: case comment. Bench: Fazal Ali, Saiyid Kania, Hiralal J Sastri, M. Patanjali Mahajan, Mehar Chand Das, Sudhi Ranjan Mukhreja, B.k Petitioner/appellant: Romesh Thappar Respondent: State of Madras Date of Judgment: 26/05/1950 Facts: The Editor(petitioner) is a printer, publisher, and editor of a recently started weekly journal in English
VELLORE CITIZENS WELFARE FORUM V. UNION OF INDIA Author: Mr. Mudit Saxena, Galgotias University APPELLANT: Vellore Citizens Welfare Forums RESPONDENT: Union of India rep. by its Secretary, Department of Environment and Others BENCH: Justice Kuldip Singh, Justice Faizan Uddin, Justice K. Venkataswami COURT: Supreme Court CITATION: AIR 1996 SC 2715: (1996) 5 SCC 647 DECIDED ON:
Author: Ayush Jain, Unitedworld School of Law, Gandhinagar, Gujarat Francis Coralie vs. Union Territory of Delhi: Case-Comment Bench: Hon’bleJustice P.N. Bhagwati and S. Murtaza Fazal Ali PETITIONER/ APPELLANT: Francis Coralie Mullin RESPONDENT: Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi and Ors. Date of Judgment: 13.01.1981 Citation: 1981 AIR 746, 1981 SCR (2) 516 Facts: The petitioner, who
Author: Manan Agrawal, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi. SUNIL BATRA VS DELHI ADMINISTRATION 1980 AIR 1579, 1980 SCR (2) 557 Bench: Krishnaiyer, V.R. PETITIONER: SUNIL BATRA RESPONDENT: DELHI ADMINISTRATION DATE OF JUDGMENT- 20/12/1979 Facts:- Mr. Batra was found guilty by the sessions court of the offence of murder and was awarded capital sentence in
