Queen Mary School Northend v. Director Of Education Quorum: Justice Jayant Nath Appearance: Advocates RomyChacko, Shakti Chand Jaidwl and VarunMudgal (for Petitioner); Standing Counsel Ramesh Singh with Advocates SantoshTripathi and BhawnaKataria (for Respondent) Prayer of the Petitioner This petitioner filed the petition seeking an appropriate writ toquash the Circular dated 18.04.2020. The petitioner prayed to allow the petitioner School tocharge the actual expenditure incurred by it during the lockdown period inthe form of fees from the students. Other connected reliefs are also....
Read MoreD.K.Basu vs. State of West Bengal Real name of the case- [Shri D.K.Basu, Ashok K.Johri vs. State of W.B., State of U.P] Bench- Js. Kuldip Singh, Js. (Dr.) A.S. Anand. Date of Judgment- December 18th, 1996. Precedent considered- {Nilabati Behera vs. State of Orissa} [1993] Notable Fact- there were as many as approximately 51 number of Advocates involved in the present case with one “amicus curiae” (friend of court) Dr. A.M.Singhvi. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE- On 26thAugust, 1986 one Basu D....
Read MoreState of Bombay vs. Kathi Kalu Oghad & Others. Bench: Total no.- 11 Majority: B.P. Sinha (CJI), J.R.Mudholkar, K.SubbaRao, K.N.Wanchoo, N.R.Ayyangar, RaghubarDayal, P.B.Gajendragadkar, Syed Jaffer Imam. Minority: A K Sarkar, K C Dasgupta, S K Das. BACKGROUND OF THE CASE- The precedent considered in this case was [M.P. Sharma v. Satish Chandra/(A.I.R. 1954/SC 300)] where it has been held by the court that the term, “to be a witness”mentioned in Art..20(3) of the Indian Constitution was equivalent to ‘furnish evidence’ and therefore....
Read MoreShamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan (2015) Bench- Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dipak Misra and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Prafulla C. Pant Introduction- What is disturbing is that though the application for grant of maintenance was filed in the year 1998, it was not decided till 17.2.2012. It is also shocking to note that there was no order for grant of interim maintenance. It needs no special emphasis to state that when an application for grant of maintenance is filed by....
Read MoreRoxann Sharma v. Arun Sharma (2015) Facts- Roxann Sharma and Arun Sharma married in U.S.A and had a child named Thalbir Sharma. After sometime they returned India and started residing in Mumbai. It was stated the husband and wife had differences with one another and an application for dissolution of marriage was filed and afterwards a petition was filed under Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 for guardianship and custody of Thalbir sharma. During the pendency of case the child....
Read MoreDanamma @ Suman Surpur v. Amar (2018) Backdrop of the Case- The present case is an appeal from the judgment of the High Court who while upholding the decision of the Trial Court, refused to hold the appellants as Coparceners due to being born before the date of the enactment of the Act. The appellants being the two daughters of Mr. Gurulingappa Savadi. The other parties are two sons and wife, namely Arun, Vijay and Sumitra respectively. The suit of....
Read MoreJoseph Shine v. Union of India (2018) Introduction- In india, Adultery law is defined in section 497 of Indian Penal Code. Section 497 comes under the purview of the courts several times in the past but everytime Supreme Court held section 497 as valid. But the Supreme Court on 27th September 2018 in the case of Joseph Shine v. Union of India has brought down the 158 years old Victorian Morality law on adultery. The petition was filed by a....
Read MoreFederation of Obstetric and Gynecological Societies of India (FOGSI) v. Union of India & Ors. (2019) Supreme Court: Refusing to strike down Section 23 of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994, the bench of Arun Mishra and Vineet Saran, JJ held, “dilution of the provisions of the Act or the Rules would only defeat the purpose of the Act to prevent female foeticide and relegate the right to life of the girl child under....
Read MoreThe Secretary, Ministry of Defence v. Babita Puniya & Ors. (2020) Introduction- In a resounding rebuff to the Army, the Bench of Supreme Court comprising of Justices DY Chandrachud and Ajay Rastogi not just trashed the Army’s weaker sex argument for denying them permanent commission as it had just no merit but also blasted the Army’s dogged resistance to provide permanent commission to women officers! The Bench also said that these were based on sex stereotypes premised on assumptions about....
Read MoreADM(Additional District Magistrate) Jabalpur v. Shivakant Shukla Bench- Majority- A. N. Ray, M. H. Beg, Y. V.Chandrachud, P. N.Bhagwati, Dissenting- H. N. Khanna. Background of the case- The background and history of the case can be understood with the help of following pointers: June 12, 1975- Justice Jagmohansinha in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Raj Narain (1975 AIR 875) held Indira Gandhi convict of indulging into wrongful practices for election to Lok Sabha. Her election was held to be....
Read More
