Vishaka & Others vs State of Rajasthan Bench of Judges CJI, SUJATA V. MANIHAR, B.N.KIRPAL Case brief This case is related to the evil of sexual harassment of women at working place. This case is the landmark case in the history of the sexual harassment that is decided by the Supreme Court. Sexual harassment means
CITATION- AIR 1994 SC 1918 DECIDED ON- 11.03.1994 BENCH- S.R. Pandian, A.M. Ahmadi, Kuldip Singh, J.S. Verma, P.B. Sawant, K. Ramaswamy, S.C. Agrawal, Yogeshwar Dayal and B.P. Jeevan Reddy, JJ. CASE INTRODUCTION-This case is considered to be a landmark judgement in the history of India. Till the judgement of the case As per the provision of Article 356
Citation : W. P. (Crl.) No. 76 of 2016 Bench Dipak Misra, CJI; Rohinton Fali Nariman, J.; A. M. Khanwilkar, J; D. Y. Chandrachud, and Indu Malhotra, J Facts The central issue of the case was the constitutional validity of section 377 of IPC, 1860 insofar because it applied to the consensual sexual conduct of adults of an equivalent sex privately. During
Citation : 1985 AIR 945, 1985 SCR (3) 844 Bench: Y.V. Chandrachud, D.A Desai, O Reddy, Venkataramiah Chinnappa, Rangnath Misra Facts – The appellant married to the respondent in 1932 and five children were born out of the wedlock. The appellant drove the respondent out of matrimonial home in 1975. In April 1978, the respondent
Author :- Ayesha Majid INTRODUCTION The unprecedented Covid- 19 has created new challenges and new situations in every field and the law and legal practice is no different. It has led to many changing dimensions ranging from the virtual meeting apps, remote hearing, closing of courts to electronic filing, restricting hearing to only urgent matters
CITATION- AIR 2005 SC 3820 BENCH- P. Venkatarama Reddi, P.P. Naolekar, JJ. FACTS- On 13 December 2001, five heavily armed persons entered the premises of Parliament House complex for carrying a very deadly attack. They were on a white Ambassador car and had automatic assault rifles, pistols, hand & rifle grenades, electronic detonators, explosives in
Introduction This a case of conspiracy against the Raja Nand Kumar, this was set up indirectly by the Governor General Warren Hastings and Chief Justice Impey of the Supreme Court of Calcutta. The general had enmity by Nand kumar, he fought battle of Plessey by the side of king. He was admired by the kings,
Minerva Mills Ltd. & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors Author : Alisha Rahman Bench: Y.V. Chandrachud, (Cj), P.N. Bhagwati, A.C. Gupta, N.L. Untwalia, P.S. Kailasam Case brief: Section 4 & 55 of 42th amendment of constitution damage the basic structure of constitution. In the Minerva Mills case, the supreme court provided key classifications
Citation: 1963 AIR 649, 1962 SCR Supl. (1) 439 Bench: Sinha, Bhuvneshwar P.(Cj), Gajendragadkar, P.B., Wanchoo, K.N., Gupta, K.C. Das, Shah, J.C. Facts An order Mysore government issued under article 15(4) reserved seats for admission to the state medical and engineering colleges. On July 26, 1958 the state issued an order that all the communities
Donoghue v Stevenson also known as the ‘snail in the bottle case’ is a Scottish case which turned out to be very significant in framing law of tort and doctrine of negligence mainly with respect to English law. FACTS On August 26 1928, Mrs Donoghue’s companion ordered and paid for her bottle of ginger-beer from
