WELCOME TO AASHAYEIN LAW EDUCATION CENTER

  • 3rd Floor, Radhika Heights, 284, in front of APT House, Zone-II, Maharana Pratap Nagar, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462011

  • +91 9691073595 Office, Bhopal

02 Apr 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

Balaji Raghavan v. Union of India (1996) 1 SCC 361

Balaji Raghavan, a petitioner, approached the Kerala High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, seeking a writ of mandamus to stop the government from granting National Awards like the Padma Vibhushan and Padma Shri. He argued these awards violated Article 18(1) of the Constitution, which prohibits the state from conferring non-military or non-academic titles. The case involved written submissions from both sides between 1992 and 1994, but no oral arguments or interim orders were made by the Kerala High Court. The matter....

Read More
02 Apr 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

Shantabai v State of Bombay (1958)

Shrimati Shantabai, the petitioner, was granted the right to cut and use wood from certain forests within her husband’s Zamindari through an unregistered document. However, with the enactment of the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights (Estates, Mahals, Alienated Lands) Act, 1950, all proprietary rights over such lands were transferred to the State. Despite this, she obtained permission from the Deputy Commissioner under the Act to continue working in the forest and began cutting trees. Subsequently, the Divisional Forest Officer....

Read More
02 Apr 2025

Posted by: Aishwarya Chourasia

Ranjit Sarkar vs. Ravi Ganesh Bhardwaj and Others 2025 (SC) 369

The Bench Comprising Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Manmohan  Introduction: The Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether the absence of a complainant on a date fixed by the court should necessarily result in the acquittal of the accused under Section 256 of the CrPC and its equivalent in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS). The Court examined the applicability of acquittal provisions when the complainant fails to appear, and whether such a failure should automatically lead to an acquittal. Facts:....

Read More
02 Apr 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar vs. State of Maharashtra (1966)

Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar, a journalist at Blitz, wrote an article alleging that businessman Krishnaraj M.D. Thackersey manipulated the import of silk yarn for personal gain, using fabricated documents and black market dealings. Thackersey filed a defamation suit against the magazine. During the trial, defense witness Bhaichand G. Goda supported Blitz’s claims but requested the court to prohibit the publication of his statements, fearing business losses. The court accepted his request and orally barred Blitz from reporting his testimony. When Blitz....

Read More
02 Apr 2025

Posted by: Aishwarya Chourasia

The State of Jharkhand & Ors. vs. Rukma Kesh Mishra 2025 (SC) 368

The Bench of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Manmohan  Introduction: The Supreme Court held that Article 311(1) of the Indian Constitution does not mandate that only the appointing authority can initiate disciplinary proceedings against a government servant. The Court clarified that while the appointing authority must approve dismissal, the initiation of disciplinary action can be done by any superior authority unless explicitly restricted by relevant service rules. The ruling overturned a High Court decision that had quashed the respondent’s dismissal based....

Read More
29 Mar 2025

Posted by: Aishwarya Chourasia

Imran Pratapgarhi v. State of Gujarat 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 362

A Bench Comprising Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan Introduction The Supreme Court has ruled that a preliminary inquiry must be conducted before registering an FIR in cases involving speech, writing, or artistic expression if the alleged offence carries a punishment between three to seven years. This decision aims to prevent frivolous and unjustified FIRs that could infringe upon the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution. The Court referred to Section 173(3)....

Read More
29 Mar 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

E. Hulton & Co. v. Jones [1910] A.C. 20

In this case, the defendants, who were newspaper publishers, published an article about a fictional character named Artemus Jones who was portrayed as having an affair. However, coincidentally, there was a real person named Artemus Jones who felt that the article defamed him and filed a defamation lawsuit. The Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the claimant, Artemus Jones. The defendants appealed, arguing that they had no intention of referring to the real Artemus Jones, as they were unaware....

Read More
29 Mar 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

Surinder Singh Deswal & Ors. V/s Virender Gandhi & Anr.

The appellants, former partners of Bhoomi Infrastructure Co. (now GLM Infratech Pvt. Ltd.), issued 64 cheques to Respondent No. 1 as part payment of his retirement dues. One cheque of ₹45,84,915, deposited on 06.04.2015, was dishonoured due to insufficient funds, along with the other cheques. Respondent No. 1 filed 28 complaints under Section 138 of the NI Act, leading to the conviction of the appellants by the Judicial Magistrate on 30.10.2018. The appellants appealed and sought suspension of their sentence....

Read More
28 Mar 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

Lily Thomas vs. Union of India Case (2013)

Mrs. Sushmita Ghosh and Mr. Gyan Chand Ghosh got married on 10th May 1985 following Hindu rituals and traditions. However, after just a few months, on 22nd April 1992, Mr. Ghosh informed his wife that he no longer wished to stay with her and insisted on getting a divorce by mutual consent. Since it was a new marriage, Mrs. Sushmita Ghosh was unwilling to consent to a divorce and expressed her desire to continue living with her husband. Later, Mr.....

Read More
28 Mar 2025

Posted by: Manas shrivastava

K. M NANAVATI vs STATE OF MAHARASHTRA (1962)

Commander Kawas Manekshaw Nanavati, an officer in the Indian Navy, was tried for the murder of Prem Ahuja, his wife Sylvia’s lover. In March 1959, Nanavati and his family moved to Bombay, where they met Prem Ahuja, a businessman, through an old friend. While Nanavati was often away on duty, Sylvia began an affair with Prem. She eventually developed feelings for him and asked if he would marry her and take responsibility for her children. However, Prem’s response was evasive,....

Read More