The order came after the NIA told the court that the marriage in question could be part of a ‘larger mechanism’ to convert Hindu girls to Islam.
Justices R.K. Agrawal and M.M. Shantanagoudar listed the case for hearing on August 17, saying “this matter requires lengthy hearing” .
Article 35A, added to the constitution by a presidential order in 1954, denies property rights to a woman who marries a person from outside the state.
The apex court has issued a notice to Karti and four others in the case and posted the matter for hearing on August 18th.
Regardless of the Supreme Court’s final verdict, the false dichotomy between privacy and welfare must be expunged.
The court, however, said the verdict rendered in the pending petition will determine the outcome of the present plea as well.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court today decided to hold the final hearing in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute from December 5 and made it clear that no adjournment shall be given in any circumstance. The apex court, after an intense deliberation for more than one and a […]
Men’s rights activist, state agencies and even the Supreme Court seem to have bought into this propaganda, but surveys on the ground tell a very different story.
Given the “socio-economic realities” around child marriage in India, the Centre argued before the Supreme Court, the exception is needed to “protect the institution of marriage.”
According to a CBI investigation, medical colleges debarred by the Supreme Court paid health ministry officials large sums to try and get the order lifted.
Misra will take over from CJI J.S. Khehar, who will retire on August 27.
A bench headed by Chief Justice J.S. Khehar issued notice to the Centre and sought its reply within four weeks.
The Allahabad High Court had, in 2010, ruled a three-way division of the disputed 2.77 acres at the Ram Janambhoomi-Babri masjid site in Ayodhya.
Apart from the abuse going completely unnoticed by her school and family, the court’s denial of an abortion will inflict even more violence on this child.
The amount is to be deposited with the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee within two weeks.
The Supreme Court’s upcoming verdict on the right to privacy could have a serious impact on society.
Both the Congress and the BJP had opposed the Election Commission’s decision to introduce the NOTA option, saying it went against the constitution.
Protests against the Supreme Court’s ruling upholding the 2015 high court verdict that shiksha-mitras are not asli teachers have brought rural UP to a halt.
Parrikar said in the House that the ban on sale of liquor along the highways was likely to cause a revenue loss of Rs 7 crore to the Goa government.
The committee, headed by former Supreme Court judge B N Srikrishna, will also suggest a draft data protection bill.
By saying that the misuse of IPC Section 498A is rampant and needs to be tackled by instituting welfare committees to look into cases before action is taken, the court has revealed its biases.
Not only do difficult questions need to be answered and competing interests be weighed, but consequent policy also needs to be made to ensure a balanced state of affairs.
The Centre was ordered to pay Chellamma Palani her pension three years ago – after which it appealed and appealed until the Supreme Court upheld the order last week.
The Maharashtra government’s lawyer added that privacy wasn’t an exact concept, so couldn’t be treated as a fundamental right yet.
The reforms that have not been implemented include one state, one vote; the size of the national selection panel; the size of the apex council and ones that cover age cap and tenure of office bearers.
A nine-judge constitution bench is hearing arguments in the case on whether right to privacy is a fundamental right.
The court saying too much time has passed for concrete evidence to emerge is against established laws, the Jammu Kashmir Coalition of Civil Society argued.
If the government wants to protect the data of individuals collected by private entities, why does it deny the same under the Aadhaar scheme?
A combined effort by both the Centre and the states is necessary to implement Acts, especially welfare schemes like the Food Security Act, to ensure people have a better quality of life.
A bench headed by Justice Dipak Misra was informed by the additional solicitor general that the process to bring in a DNA Profiling Bill has been initiated.
During the hearings, one judge had observed that the ‘right to privacy’ is not absolute and it can’t stop the legislature from imposing reasonable restrictions.
The court cannot simply declare privacy to be a fundamental right. It needs to explore its contours, including implications for the right to free speech.
Senior counsel Gopal Subramanium told the apex court that the right to privacy is a pre-existing natural right which is inherent in the constitution.
The court has also said it will arrange for security for the couple filing the appeal, an activist helping them and their advocate.
If the nine-judge bench decides that privacy is a fundamental right, the issue will be thrown back to the five-judge bench who will decide the contours of this right and consequently rule on the validity of Aadhaar.
The central bank said that making the list public would “hurt the business climate in the country and endanger the jobs of thousands working in these entities”.
While the courts deliver pro-women judgements around abortions, parliament has delayed passing much-needed amendments to the MTP Act.
The US Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to block ruling that exempted grandparents of US citizens of refugees from Trump’s travel ban.
Despite objections by the government and the army, a two-judge bench ordered the CBI to institute a SIT to probe the alleged extra-judicial killings.
When the bench asked ECI to clarify its stand, its lawyer said the poll panel is supporting the cause to the extent of decriminalisation of politics.