ALEC - Aashayein Law Education Center|Law Coaching in Bhopal

16 Jan 2025

Posted by: Aishwarya Chourasia

JUST RIGHTS FOR CHILDREN ALLIANCE vs. S. HARISH 2024 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 728

Bench CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala The Supreme Court in Case Just rights for children alliance Vs S. Harish, a bench comprising CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala addressed critical issues concerning the possession and consumption of child sexual exploitative and abuse material (CSEAM) under Indian law. The Court's judgment clarified the legal interpretations of relevant provisions in the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, and the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000, emphasizing the stringent....

10 Jan 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

The case of Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra

The case of Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra is a landmark judgment in India, shaping the course of juvenile justice and human rights. Social activist Sheela Barse played a pivotal role by raising her voice against the inhumane conditions prevalent in Indian jails and juvenile homes, bringing attention to the need for reform and justice. Facts of the case Journalist Sheela Barse, based in Bombay, sought permission to interview female inmates in Maharashtra prisons. She was told she could....

09 Jan 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

S.P. Sampath Kumar v. Union of India, (1987) 1 SCC 124

The petitioners challenged the validity of Article 323A of the Constitution, which was added by the 42nd Amendment in 1976. This article excluded the High Courts' jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 in service-related matters. Additionally, they contested Sections 4, 5, 6, and 28 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. These sections laid out the qualifications and appointment procedures for the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of the Administrative Tribunal. The case focused on two key issues: Whether removing the High Courts’....

06 Jan 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

MACHHI SINGH v. STATE OF PUNJAB (1983 AIR 957)

In India, the death penalty is a highly debated topic, with some advocating for its complete abolition and others supporting its retention. Indian courts have generally upheld the validity of the death penalty but emphasize the need for fair and judicious use of the discretionary power granted to them. While courts strive to follow consistent principles in such cases, the application of these guidelines remains a critical challenge. The case of Machi Singh v. State of Punjab is significant as....

04 Jan 2025

Posted by: Manas Shrivastava

PUDR v. Union of India (AIR 1982 SC 1473)

In this case, child labourers in the construction sector of Delhi filed a complaint, claiming that Article 24 of the constitution which prohibits assigning children under the age of 14 to hazardous jobs had been violated. Additionally, representatives of construction companies employed workers from impoverished areas in Orissa, Bihar, West Bengal, Madhya Pradesh, Andhra Pradesh, and Rajasthan to work on the stadiums and infrastructure, including as flyovers and hotels, on the ASIAD-82 sites. Facts of the Case During the ASIAD-82....

03 Jan 2025

Posted by: Manas Shrivastava

MK Ranjitsinh and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors

In the case of MK Ranjitsinh and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors., the Supreme Court acknowledged freedom from the harmful effects of climate change as a distinct fundamental right. This decision expanded the scope of Articles 14 (equality before the law) and 21 (right to life and personal liberty) of the Indian Constitution. The petitioners argued that overhead power lines in Gujarat and Rajasthan's arid regions posed a grave threat to the critically endangered Great Indian Bustard (GIB).....

02 Jan 2025

Posted by: Manas Shrivastava

EPURU SUDHAKAR & ORS VS. GOVT. OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ORS, 2006 8 SCC 161

BENCH: HON’BLE JUSTICE "ARIJIT PASAYAT" & JUSTICE S.H KAPADIA INTRODUCTION - The process of granting a pardon in India begins with the submission of a mercy petition to the President under Article 72 of the Constitution. The petition is initially reviewed by the Home Ministry, which consults with the relevant state government. Following the Home Minister's recommendations, the petition is forwarded to the President for consideration. The authority to grant pardons is an integral part of the constitutional framework. Article....

31 Dec 2024

Posted by: Manas Shrivastava

Anuradha Bhasin V/S Union of India (2020)

The landmark case of Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India underscores the fundamental right of the right to freedom of speech and expression in a democratic society. In August 2019, the government imposed restrictions on communication networks, including internet and mobile services, in Jammu and Kashmir. This case represents a pivotal moment in Indian constitutional law, as the Supreme Court reaffirmed the essential role of constitutional rights and clarified the limits of governmental authority in restricting fundamental freedoms. For Judiciary....

30 Dec 2024

Posted by: Manas Shrivastava

State of Rajasthan v. Union of India (AIR 1977 SC 1361)

Given federalism and the balance of power between the Union and State governments, this case is significant in Indian constitutional law because it discusses the extent and bounds of the President's authority under Article 356. Following the general elections in 1977, it investigates the constitutionality of the Central Government's orders to dissolve state legislatures and the subjectivity of the President's satisfaction under Article 356 to judicial scrutiny. Although the President's pleasure is subjective and often not susceptible to judicial review,....