- Home
- About ALEC
- Course Offered
- About Exam
- Blog
- Judgements
- Enquiry
- Syllabus
- Online Class
- Privacy Policy
- Enroll Now
The Oleum gas leak happened at Shriram Food and Fertiliser Industries, a branch of Delhi Cloth Mills Ltd., in the crowded area of Kirti Nagar, Delhi. The gas leak caused serious harm to people living nearby. In response, a lawyer named M.C. Mehta filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court on December 4 and 6, 1985, under Articles 21 and 32 of the Constitution. He asked the Court to shut down the Shriram Caustic Chlorine and Sulphuric Acid Plant....
Read MoreBench: Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Introduction: The Supreme Court in this case reiterated that the "last seen together" theory, by itself, is not sufficient to convict an accused unless it is corroborated by other compelling evidence. The Court set aside the conviction of the appellant under Section 302 IPC due to major gaps in the prosecution's circumstantial evidence. Section 302 IPC(Now Section 102 of BNS,2023): Punishment for murder Section 27 of Indian Evidence Act(Now Section 23....
Read MoreIn the case of Ashby v White, Mr. Ashby, a qualified voter, was stopped from voting in an election by Mr. White, a local constable, who wrongly claimed that Ashby was not eligible. Ashby believed this was a violation of his basic right to vote and took legal action. The case became very well-known and was even discussed in Parliament. It raised important questions about whether someone could sue a public officer in common law for being unfairly denied the....
Read MoreBench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice MM Sundresh Introduction: This case concerned the legality and fairness of the Consumer Protection Rules, 2020, particularly those regulating the appointment, qualification, selection, and tenure of Presidents and Members of the State and District Consumer Commissions. The Supreme Court examined whether the existing rules compromised judicial independence by providing excessive control to the Executive in the appointment process. Consumer Protection Act, 2019 Consumer Protection Rules, 2020 Rojer Mathew v. South Indian....
Read MoreBench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan Introduction The Supreme Court, in a significant ruling on the powers of Juvenile Justice Boards (JJBs), held that JJBs have no authority to review their own orders, and any such attempt is illegal and beyond their statutory jurisdiction. The Court also reiterated that documentary evidence such as school records prevail over medical opinion in determining juvenility under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015. Section 94(2), Juvenile....
Read MoreShah Bano, a 62-year-old woman from Madhya Pradesh, was divorced by her husband in 1978. After the divorce, she filed a case seeking maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which allows a person unable to maintain themselves to claim support. The Supreme Court ruled in her favor and held that she was entitled to maintenance, even though she was a Muslim woman. This judgment recognized the rights of Muslim women to claim alimony under general....
Read MoreIn August 1928, Mrs. Donoghue went to a café in Paisley, Scotland, with a friend. Her friend bought her a bottle of ginger beer along with some ice cream. The bottle was made of dark glass, so they couldn’t see what was inside. The café staff opened the bottle and poured some of the ginger beer over the ice cream, which Mrs. Donoghue ate. Later, when the rest of the ginger beer was poured into a glass, a dead and....
Read MoreThe case of Girjesh Dutt v. Datadin is an important judgment under Indian property law, especially related to the rules about transferring property to unborn persons. In this case, a woman (A) gifted her property to her nephew’s daughter (B). According to the terms of the gift, after B, the property was supposed to go to any male descendant of B. If there were no male descendants, it would then go to B’s daughter, and if that too failed, it....
Read MoreOn August 24, 1943, a group led by Allahabad went to the banks of the Indus River to collect reeds, despite being warned by Mohammad Hussain Shah, the father of Wali Shah, that the land belonged to him. While returning, they were stopped by Ghulam Shah, who demanded the reeds back. When the group refused, a fight broke out during which Allahabad hit Ghulam with a bamboo stick. Ghulam called out for help, and in response, Mahboob Shah and Wali....
Read MoreBench comprising of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and K. Vinod Chandran Introduction The Supreme Court, in this significant decision, reaffirmed the limited evidentiary value of statements recorded under Section 161 CrPC, emphasizing that an investigating officer’s (IO's) testimony based solely on such statements is inadmissible. The Court criticized the High Court's reversal of acquittal by relying on the IO’s interpretation of Section 161 statements, holding it to be violative of Section 162 CrPC. Section 161 CrPC (Now Section 180 of BNSS,2023)–....
Read More
