Search Results

Introduction Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India gives every citizen the right to freedom of The law of Sedition in India is affirmed under Chapter VI, “Offences against the State”, beneath Section contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards the Government established by law in India led to slapping the charge of Sedition on Ramya on the basis that she should go to Pakistan and leave India as her statement was anti-national and, in a way, insulting to the people of India.

— Justice V. R. Krishna Iyer, former judge, Supreme Court of India [3] The Constitution of India contains certain provisions India’s stand on blocking re-entry to practice is desirable. References [1] R v Sussex Justices, (1924)1 KB 256 [2] Paul L. Supreme Court Of India, (2018) 8 SCC 396 [15] Ibid [16] Constitution of the U.S.A., Art. III

National Law University, Raipur Representational Image/ Source: Unsplash Introduction The gig economy in India These concerns are now pending adjudication at the Supreme Court in Indian Federation of App-Based Transport Workers v. Union of India & Ors.

Union of India & Ors. [iv] Article 21, Constitution of India, 1950. [v] Article 19(1)(d), Constitution of India, 1950. [vi] Francis Coralie Mullin Vs. [viii] Supra v. [ix] Article 19(1)(e), Constitution of India, 1950. [x] Supra v. [xi] K. Union of India &Ors., W.P.(C) 11616/2015. [xiv] ICESCR, Art. 11(1). [xv] UDHR, Art. 25(1).

In 2016, the Supreme Court, in its landmark judgment in   Nabam Rebia v. In a subsequent judgment in Keisham Meghachandra Singh v.  (para 5.22) and even the Election Commission of India   itself have also echoed this sentiment. Opposition leaders have often voiced their distrust in the Election Commission of India (ECI), arguing Vithalbhai Patel, India's first Indian Speaker in 1925, attempted to set a precedent of being impartial

v. Time and again, the Supreme Court of India has confirmed the same. Supreme Court of India has applied this doctrine to various domains ranging from statutory laws to public In 1957, the Government of India set up the 2nd Pay Commission Committee , whose recommendations were The Supreme Court has confirmed the same in the case of Indian Aluminum Co Ltd v.

recordings have been held to be admissible as electronic evidence falling under the meaning of the Indian Also, in IMA v. Union of India , the Court went into the ambit of article 15(2) insofar it prohibits private discrimination In the case of Consumer Education and Research Centre (CERC) v. Union of India where the Court was riddled with the right to health of employees, it held that such

recommendations were made for streamlined registration of foreign suppliers offering online gaming services in India The ' All India Gaming Federation ' seeks clarification on these amendments. Impact of Changes on Tax Incidence Recent tax reforms in India's online gaming sector have sparked concerns India's imposition of a 28% GST on contest entry fees and 30% TDS on net winnings sets a harsh precedent India, as an emerging economy with significant digital prowess, risks hindering growth by neglecting

Union of India (UOI) and Ors. [1] , the Supreme Court of India held that the Right to Privacy is guaranteed Sharma & Ors. v. Satish Chandra, DM, Delhi & Ors. [2] and Kharak Singh v. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and Ors. v. Union of India (UOI) and Ors [4] . regulations in India. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and Ors. v. Union of India (UOI) and Ors., AIR 2017 SC 4161. [2] M.P.

University (NFSU), Delhi Introduction The death penalty has always been a topic of global debate, and India India’s Position: The Impact of the Aparajita Woman and Child Bill, 2024 The proposed death penalty for Although India has always maintained the death penalty for crimes deemed exceptionally serious, this Furthermore, questions have been raised concerning the ability of India’s legal system to administer Moreover, the Supreme Court of the US, in the famous case of Roper v.

year law student at Rajiv Gandhi National University of Law, Punjab Background The Supreme Court of India The statistics of both courts, raise grave concerns about the diversity and inclusivity of the Indian The Indian higher judiciary, which essentially serves as the gatekeeper for upholding the principles In his dissenting judgment in Naresh v. Kraemer, 334 US 1 (1948); Budhan v.

Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University, Lucknow Introduction In a democratic country like India, The supporters of the petitions argue that as India already decriminalized homosexual relationships in So, should India legalize same-sex marriages or not? Violative of Article 19 Further, Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India guarantees all citizens Union of India , recognition has been made that sex and gender are fundamentally rooted in psychology