- Home
- About ALEC
- Course Offered
- About Exam
- Blog
- Judgements
- Enquiry
- Syllabus
- Online Class
- Privacy Policy
- Enroll Now
Sukanya Shantha vs Union of India (2024) is a landmark Supreme Court case addressing caste-based discrimination in Indian prisons. The case, filed by journalist Sukanya Shantha, was triggered by her investigative article that exposed how prison manuals in various Indian states allowed for practices perpetuating caste hierarchies. She sought to challenge these discriminatory practices, which violated the fundamental rights of equality and dignity enshrined in the Constitution. Background and Facts Sukanya Shantha, in her article titled “From Segregation to....
Read MoreIntroduction: Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India is a landmark case in Indian jurisprudence, where the Supreme Court decriminalized consensual homosexual relations, marking a significant victory for LGBTQ+ rights. The case challenged Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), a colonial-era law that criminalized "carnal intercourse against the order of nature," effectively making homosexual acts illegal. This judgment overruled previous rulings and upheld the principles of equality, dignity, and privacy under the Constitution of India. Background of....
Read MoreIn a recent development, the Supreme Court of India has rejected a petition seeking to reduce the duration of the Bachelor of Laws (LLB) program from five years to three years. The petition was filed by a group of students who argued that the current five-year program is too long and financially burdensome, especially for women whose careers are often delayed due to societal pressures to marry. Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, heading the bench that dismissed the petition, expressed concerns....
Read MoreMohd. Ahmed khan v. Shah bano begum AIR 1985 SC 945 BENCH Justice Y. V. Chandrachud, Rangath Misra, Justice D. A. Desai, Justice O. Chinnappa Reddy, Justice E. S. Venkataramiah FACTS In 1972, Shah Bano, a Muslim woman, was married to Mohammed Ahmad Khan, an affluent and well-known advocate in Indore, Madhya Pradesh, and had five children from the wedlock. After 14 years, Ahmad Khan took a younger woman as second wife and after years of living with both wives,....
Read MoreAIR 1997 SC 610 Custody means restricting anyone's freedom of movement. The fundamental right to move freely can be taken by the procedure established by law. In India, the person's fundamental right to move can be restricted legally either by the way of judicial or police custody. The object behind either of custody is to prevent the person so taken into the custody from further committing an offence or tampering of evidences or threatening of the witnesses etc. The prima....
Read MoreAIR 1973 SC 1461 Background of the Case The events which are leading to Kesavananda Bharti's case dates back to 1951. Soon after the enforcement of the Constitution, the question was prevalent regarding the extent of amending powers of the Constitution. The prominent question in all the following cases was that whether fundamental rights are amendable and whether the word 'law' under Article 13 includes the amending law. For the first time, the said question was raised in the case....
Read MoreKush Kalra vs. Union of India and Ors. 2021 BENCH: Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice BR Gavai FACTS OF THE CASE: In the Delhi High Court, the PIL had been filed for the issuance of writ of mandamus to the respondents i.e. Union of India and Indian Army. The writ petition had been filed by the appellant for inclusion of women Indian Territorial Army at par with men. The criterion for selection to the Indian Territorial Army was possible if women....
Read MoreDR. HARISH KUMAR KHURANA vs. JOGINDER SINGH AND ORS. 2021 Medical Negligence is basically the combination of two words i.e. medical and negligence. Negligence means absence of due care and caution; when the medical practitioner fails to exercise due care and caution it is called medical negligence. Medical negligence is primarily an offence under Consumer Protection Act and Indian Penal Code. Under the Consumer Protection Act, the doctor is considered as the expert in his field and patients are his....
Read MoreVINEETA SHARMA vs. RAKESH SHARMA & ORS. AIR 2020 SC 3717 Bench- Justice Arun Mishra, Justice M. R. Shah and Justice S. Abdul Nazeer Background of the Case- In India after the Independence, the lawmakers introduced the Hindu Code Bill which would consolidate and codify the Hindu Personal Laws. After the lot protest around the country, the Hindu Code Bill became a law and 4 legislations were enacted i.e. The Hindu Marriage....
Read MoreSATYABRATA GHOSE VS. MUGNEERAM BANGUR & CO. AIR 1954 SC 44 The Indian Contract Act, 1872 specifies the conditions under which the parties can be discharged of their contractual liabilities, one such condition is doctrine of frustration. The doctrine of frustration is an English Common Law doctrine which has been incorporated under Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 and hence given the statutory recognition. According to this doctrine, if the performance of a contract becomes impossible due to....
Read More
