Search Results

Article 21 of The Constitution of India Article 21 of the constitution guarantees its citizens the right "An intrinsic part of Article 21 of the Constitution would be the freedom of choice in marriage,". According to this article, the right to marry is a part of the right to life. It not only violates Articles 14 or 15 but also 21 .  In the case of Supriyo Chakraborty v. where the court stated that there is no fundamental right to marry, but some aspects are located in Article

Article 14: Infringement of the Right to Equality Before the Law Article 14 guarantees the right to equality Article 19(1)(a): Infringement of Right to Freedom of Speech and Expression The right to share ideas No Legitimate Goal: Article 19(1)(a) guarantees free speech and expression, but Article 19(2) allows Article 19(1)(g): Infringement of the Right to Practice Any Profession, or to Carry on any Occupation 19(1)(g) and the social control allowed by Article 19(6).

, a law student at Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur Supreme Court of India Introduction Article Interpreting Article 361 Clause 1 of Article 361 provides immunity for official acts done by the President The Constituent Assembly Debate  on Article 361, which was Article 302 in the draft Constitution, seems 53 and 154 respectively and because they act on the advice of the Council of Ministers under Articles While Article 361(1) rightly provides immunity for official acts, the problem lies with Article 361(2

Shri Ranganatha Reddy (1977), this article explores the legal and socio-economic dimensions of wealth The article insists that the idea of socialism, which the legislature built and engraved in our preamble Contrastingly, the bottom 50% controls a measly 6.5% and 15% of the wealth and income, respectively. 30 percent to 22 percent, with newly incorporated companies shelling out a lower tax percentage at 15 14, and even if there were a violation of Article 14, Article 31C would protect the legislation, given

Doctrine of Reasonable Restriction Article 19 (2) refers to “reasonable restriction” over the exercise Supreme Court has held that freedom of speech and expression is subject to reasonable restriction under Article Union of India, [iv] it was held that freedom of speech and expression guaranteed under Article 19 ( Nevertheless, the Court has struck it down on being violative of Article 19 (1) (a). Gaurav Ashwin Jain, (2007) 4 SCC 737. [vii] Virendra v. State of Punjab, 1958 SCR 308.

The issue being discussed in this article is not only pertinent to the Ram Janmabhoomi judgement or the The article also discusses more holistic alternatives to the Act that would maintain religious harmony 21 and that an inability to access the Courts violates Article 14 of the Constitution .   Even in India, in the case of In Re: Article 370 of the Constitution , Justice S.K. In Re Article 370 gave due consideration to the art of “ubuntu”  or humanity to others that should be

The petitioners, while seeking police protection under Article 226 , cited threats from their families Additionally, the Court asserted that the rights to life and personal liberty under Article 21  of the The charges included Section 366A  of the IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the POCSO Act , pertaining to penetrative

The Indian Constitution's Article 21 guarantees of life and personal liberty are inextricably related Article 21 provides that "no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according This decision emphasises how the Indian Constitution's Article 21, which protects the right to life and Violation of Article 14: The ED has put forth a strong argument against granting interim bail based on the right to campaign, citing concerns about equality before the law as guaranteed by Article 14 of

his rights to express his opinions under the right to freedom of speech and expression as provided by Article went against its own liberal view of what can be constituted as contempt, in the case of Arundhati Roy[4] Shiv Shankar & Others, 1988 AIR 1208. [4]Arundhati Roy vs Unknown, AIR 2002. [5]Regina vs Police Commissioner

Shivangi Pahuja, Legal Academician Link to Join: TECHNICAL SESSION: 4 | THEME: ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

It is argued in this article that the NALSA judgment blurs the line of distinction between horizontal Union of India, but leaving the phrase “backward classes” open-ended under Articles 15(4) and 16(4) ensured Union of India ((2014) 5 SCC 438), expanded the scope of Articles 15(4) and 16(4) of the Indian Constitution This expansive notion of Article 15(4) and 16(4) was further solidified in the Jat reservations judgment reservation for SC, ST and OBCs, where each of these groups has its own “separate” reservation under Article

Supreme Court held that the Preamble is not a part of the Constitution and therefore not amendable under Article was never embraced in the Preamble by the initial framers, although the Directive Principles such as Article Article 368  stipulates that amendments to the Constitution have to be approved by a two-thirds majority