There is a growing, cross-border jurisprudence that is coming to understand that arguments against criminal defamation go beyond parochialism and are applicable in any constitutional democracy that claims to value the freedom of speech and expression.
If India continues to rely on PILs to litigate corruption, it shall forever remain wedded to the courts, stopping Indian justice from flourishing.
“Some people laugh when they hear jokes, some are reserved. How can we issue guidelines as to how people should conduct themselves?” asked the SC bench.
Supreme Court rebuffs challenge to repeated promulgation of Enemy Property ordinance, says national security considerations are involved.
The collegium appears divided on the issues of transparency and government influence in the judge selection process, further aggravating the burden on the Supreme Court.
For the Supreme Court, the question of interim stay on Tamil Nadu’s Jallikattu Amendment Act is still open.
A petitioner has sought the Madras high court’s directions over Justice K.S. Panicker Radhakrishnan’s ‘Man of the Year’ citation from PETA. But the petition is misconceived only several fronts.
The court also appointed another lawyer as an assistant as the petitioner in the case was deserted by his lawyers and struggled to find replacements.
Taking exception to the widespread protests across the state in support of Jallikattu, the Supreme Court observed that such things cannot be permitted in a country governed by the rule of law.
Given previous cases, the Centre’s decision to remove (or not) governors after allegations of cognisable offences seems to depend on their political leanings.
The apex court initiated this as an interim measure to make sure that the BCCI implements Justice Lodha panel recommendations.
Justice P.B. Sawant Blasts Bombay High Court for ‘Dangerous’ Order on Bail for Men Accused of Communal Murder
The former Supreme Court judge said that granting bail to the accused, charged with murder, on grounds that they were provoked in the name of religion, could likely aggravate the communal atmosphere in the country.
Petitioner’s counsel Prashant Bhushan tweeted an image of Justice Arun Mishra at an informal gathering with Madhya Pradesh chief minister Shivraj Singh Chauhan, one of the alleged recipients of the pay off.
A shift to electronic medical records has not been matched with a legal framework on data collection and use, or on breaches.
Senior advocate Rebecca John pointed out glaring holes in the prosecution’s claims based on discrepancies in witness statements and the supposed weapons of offence.
What the home ministry’s new guidelines on how the disabled must show their respect for the national anthem tell us about the politics of pure nationalism.
Activists say exempting persons with disabilities is not the answer, but the law should take the reality into account and provide guidelines accordingly.
With evidence not adding up and workers still in jail, the defence counsel and the accused workers suspect foul play by the company.
The president commuted the death sentences of four convicts, rejecting the government’s advice because it went against a precedent.
The draft National Litigation Policy aims to make government an efficient litigant, however, the law ministry is yet to provided a timeline for its implementation.
The state government is seeking to amend the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act.
One way to bypass the complication of introducing a uniform civil code for a country as diverse as ours is to alter the laws to achieve gender equity.
Re-promulgation of ordinances is illegal, the apex court ruled, in a judgment that will be applicable to all central ordinances, including demonetisation.
The Supreme Court has missed a chance to bring the criminal defamation law within the frameworks required of a liberal, egalitarian state.
“From the courts, the underprivileged expect humane recognition of the inequities of their predicament and wise support for their cause. But what they have received is a demoralising and intimidating signal,” the statement signed by more than 100 academics said.
In a recent case, the judge ruled that the accused, charged with murder, deserved bail because they were provoked in the name of religion.
If the Supreme Court bench had relied on the precedent set by a constitution bench in 2013, it would not have insisted that the evidence – the Sahara-Birla diaries – be cogent in order to qualify for investigation.
Instilling a feeling of national unity can be a legitimate state interest but such a feeling cannot be pursued at the cost of individual liberty.
The 2015 petition from Common Cause questioning the appointment of the current CVC is still being heard, but the appeal to look into the Sahara-Birla groups’ alleged bribes has been dismissed.
Muslims in India live in constant fear. To bring about social reforms, it is first necessary to create a congenial atmosphere. Unfortunately, the Modi government has miserably failed on this front.
Negative experiences with the state’s judicial system have led many to lose faith in it and forced countless others to shy away from seeking legal recourse altogether.
As the judiciary represents the Indian state, showcasing the symbology of one particular religion in courts amounts to violating the principle of secularism
Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar led the five-judge constitution bench in the Supreme Court which had struck down the controversial NJAC Act for the appointment of judges.
The outgoing chief justice sided with the majority view because he believed it advances the constitution’s commitment to secularism, which is now recognised as one of its basic features.
The landmark judgment came while the court revisited a judgment from 1995 that called Hinduism a “way of life”.
Instead of a new law, the law ministry has asked the Law Commission to recommend changes to the existing provisions in the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Sedition, defamation, censorship, internet shutdowns – the year saw the courts being tested on a range of issues related to the freedom of expression.
The hearing for the case was rescheduled in light of a conflict of interest because the case implicates Prime Minister Modi while Khehar’s appointment as chief justice lay in his hands.
Though a recent high court judgment said administrators are not to be held liable, it cannot be seen as conclusive judicial determination on the issue.
Pranab Mukherjee re-promulgated the Enemy Property (Amendment and Validation) Ordinance for the fifth time since it wasn’t passed as an Act in parliament in the winter session.