The contents of the 60-page note suicide the former chief minister of Arunachal Pradesh left behind suggest corruption in high places and an FIR must be lodged, she says.
The court blamed search engines for not doing enough to bar advertisements and thus leading people to online material promoting sex determination and selection practices.
Despite repeated reminders from courts that Aadhaar cannot be made mandatory, government violations continue.
The BJP and its supporters, who sparked and sustained the pro-Jallikattu protests, do not seem to take the very real dangers associated with the sport seriously.
The court was responding to a petition from a Channapatna-based tailor who had raised concerns over the Centre’s decision to make Aadhaar mandatory for PDS.
Was the Supreme Court’s judgement on January 11 in the Sahara-Birla papers case truly free from bias?
The case against her goes back to 1996, soon after Jayalalithaa lost the elections.
The apex court also said that the AIADMK general secretary must serve her remaining jail term.
If India continues to rely on PILs to litigate corruption, it shall forever remain wedded to the courts, stopping Indian justice from flourishing.
Of the seven cases that were filed after the 2013 riots, two are yet to go to trial while no convictions have been made in the others.
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.
India’s Bystander Syndrome: Karnataka Teen Left to Die As Public Watches, Takes Pictures After Accident
Anwar Ali was run over by a state-run bus while he was cycling to his workplace.
Anirban Nandy, who suffers from hypertension, was subjected to verbal abuse and harassment involving the police.
Judge Neil Gorsuch has questioned how far judges should go in deferring to federal agencies’ interpretation of laws.
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.
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.
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.
In a major setback to the opposition, the Supreme Court’s decision comes in response to a PIL that was concerned that the budget might skew election results
Re-promulgation of ordinances is illegal, the apex court ruled, in a judgment that will be applicable to all central ordinances, including demonetisation.
Whether or not Karan Johar comes out is a choice that should be left to him. It shouldn’t be a burden on him because of his privilege and influence.
Despite the DRI’s allegations, the government seems strangely reticent about filing a review petition in the Supreme Court that could protect its revenue interests.
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.
The commission has sought a report from the Meerut administration over Maharaj’s comments that Muslims are responsible for the population-related problems in India.
Lawyers believe that contempt laws should be used more for when the executive flouts laws rather than for individual utterances.
Notifications for the MGNREGA and EPS programmes show the effect of new UIDAI regulations and how mandatory requirements are carefully couched so as to not openly violate the Supreme Court’s order.
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.
Chief Justice T.S. Thakur’s landmark judgment has set in stone the standards that all sports bodies will have to follow henceforth.
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”.
Sedition, defamation, censorship, internet shutdowns – the year saw the courts being tested on a range of issues related to the freedom of expression.
The national president of Swaraj India discusses the Sahara-Birla diaries, funding of political parties and how demonetisation has wrecked the rural economy in the last 50 days.
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.
The coal market in the region, which saw hope after the Supreme Court recently allowed transportation of coal from the mines of Meghalaya, is facing fresh hardship post demonetisation.
The prime minister’s words will be meaningless, other than to draw attention to Rahul Gandhi’s cause, unless he supports them with actions to reform political funding.
Seniority is not the ideal norm to determine the appointment of the chief justice of India, but there appears to be no alternative at present.
Although a law exists that criminalises insulting the national flag, national anthem and the constitution, it does not make it mandatory for a citizen to stand up when the anthem is played. The apex court has thus created a new offence without any legislation to back it.