Posts

Must Read

Gulshan Prakash v. State of Haryana (2010) 1 SCC477

By
Image
Gulshan Prakash v. State of Haryana (2010) 1 SCC 477||Case Summary  Introduction  In this appeal, the Court has interpreted Article 15(4) of the Fundamental Right. It has been added by the 1st Amendment Act, of 1951. Facts The State of Haryana instructed Maharshi Dayanand University (MDU), Rohtak to conduct entrance examination for MD/MS/PG courses for the Session 2008-2009. The appellant made a representation to the Health Secretary for providing reservation for SC and ST in the Post Graduate courses, Since there was no response from the Health Secretary the Appellant filed a petition in the High Court.  The High Court dismissed the petition of the appellant therefore the appellant approached the Supreme Court by Special Leave Petition under Article 136. Appellant Contentions  MDU, Rohtak has provided 20% reservation for the graduate level courses or undergraduate courses therefore the said University should also provide reservation in for the PG courses.  The Government o
Post a Comment
Read more

Kerala High Court Grants Bail to 19 Accused in Veterinary Student's Death

By
Kerala High Court Grants Bail to 19 Accused in Veterinary Student's Death In a case that has drawn significant public attention, the Kerala High Court has granted bail to all 19 accused in the tragic death of a veterinary student, citing insufficient evidence to support the charges of abetment to suicide. This decision has sparked a renewed debate on the judicial handling of sensitive cases involving allegations of harassment and mental health issues. The case revolves around the suicide of a young veterinary student, whose death was initially reported as a result of sustained harassment by her peers. The charges against the accused included severe allegations of bullying and mental torture, which allegedly led the student to take her own life. The incident had caused an outpouring of public grief and anger, leading to demands for stringent actions against the accused. The court's decision to grant bail was based on a detailed examination of the evidence presented by the prosec
Post a Comment
Read more

Delhi Government Petitions Supreme Court Over Water Crisis

By
Delhi Government Petitions Supreme Court Over Water Crisis In a significant move addressing the severe water crisis, the Delhi government has approached the Supreme Court, seeking the release of additional water from neighboring states such as Haryana. This plea comes in response to the acute water shortage exacerbated by the current heatwave that has gripped the capital city. The petition filed by the Delhi government emphasizes the dire situation faced by its residents. The severe heatwave has led to an unprecedented demand for water, straining the existing water supply infrastructure. The Delhi government contends that immediate intervention is necessary to mitigate the crisis and ensure an uninterrupted water supply to its population. The petition outlines several key arguments. Firstly, it highlights the shared river water agreements between states, urging compliance with these agreements to ensure equitable distribution of water resources. Secondly, it stresses the need for neigh
Post a Comment
Read more

Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Roll) AIR 2000 SC 1274

By
Image
Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Female Workers (Muster Roll) Case Summary  Facts In this landmark case, the female workers employed on a muster roll basis by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) filed a petition seeking maternity benefits. The female workers argued that they should be entitled to the same maternity benefits as regular employees under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961.  Issue Whether female workers employed on a muster roll basis are entitled to maternity benefits under the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961?  Respondent's Contentions 1. Right to Maternity Benefits : The petitioners contended that the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, which provides maternity benefits to female workers, should be applicable to them despite their muster roll status. 2. Equality and Non-discrimination: They argued that the denial of maternity benefits to muster roll female workers was discriminatory and violated their right to equality under Article 14 and right to life and personal liberty
Post a Comment
Read more

Workmen of Dimakuchi Tea Estate v. Dimakuchi Tea Estate, AIR 1958 SC 353

By
Image
Workmen of Dimakuchi Tea Estate v. Dimakuchi Tea Estate, AIR 1958 SC 353 Case Summary Introduction The case of Workmen of Dimakuchi Tea Estate v. Dimakuchi Tea Estate involved a dispute between the management of the Dimakuchi Tea Estate and its workers. This case has discussed and cleared the meaning of the expression "any person" used in S.2(K) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947. The Supreme Court ruled in favour of a limited interpretation of the term "any person" thereby excluding the present appellant from the ambit of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947. This decision denied the jurisdiction of the Industrial Tribunal to adjudicate the dispute and extended the benefits and protections of the Act to the employers. Facts of the Case The dispute was raised over the termination of the service of Dr K.P. Banerjee, who was appointed as an Assistant Medical Officer in the Respondent's estate (Dimakuchi Tea Estate), on the grounds of being incompetent. Although th
Post a Comment
Read more

State of U.P. v. Jai Bir Singh (2005) 5 SCC 1

By
Image
State of U.P. v. Jai Bir Singh (2005) Case Summary Introduction The present appeal along with other connected cases was made to this 5-Judge Bench on the reference of the 3-Judge Bench of this Court.  Factual Background Jai Bir Singh and other respondents were employed by the Uttar Pradesh State Warehousing Corporation (UPSWC), a statutory corporation. Their services were terminated without a formal inquiry or adherence to procedures laid out in the Industrial Disputes Act, of 1947. The respondents challenged their termination, claiming it was unjust and that they were entitled to protections under the Industrial Disputes Act as "workmen." Case History This case was referred by the three-judge Bench of this Court to a five-judge Bench after finding different opinions by this Court in two different cases over the same issue of whether the "Social Forestry Department" of State which is a welfare scheme would be covered by the definition of "industry"
Post a Comment
Read more

Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat (2004)

By
Image
Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh v. State of Gujarat (2004) Case Summary Facts  It was stated that as a part of retaliatory action to avenge the killing of 56 persons in the Sabarmati Express, an unruly mob burnt down the business named 'Best Bakery' at Vadodara, Gujrat. Zahira was the main eyewitness who lost her family members. She made her statement during the investigation based on which the Chargesheet was filed but she resiled from her statement during the trial. Case History The Trial Court acquitted the accused.  She approached the National Human Rights Commission [NHRC] stating that she was turned hostile during the trial because she was threatened by the powerful politicians to not speak against the accused person. Therefore, an SLP under Article 32 was filed by NHRC before the Supreme Court Court. Also, the State, though not up to the mark and with due care, and the appellant filed an appeal before the High Court and one Sahera Banu filed a revision petition before the Hi
Post a Comment
Read more

Mohd. Ajmal Amir Kasab v. State of Maharashtra (2012)

By
Image
Mohd. Ajmal Amir Kasab v. State of Maharashtra (2012) Case Summary Facts  Ajmal Kasab, a Pakistani national and a member of the terrorist organisation named " Lashkar-e-Taiba", came to India with 9 others. He carried 12 coordinated shooting and bombing attacks which lasted for four days till 29 Nov 2008 across Mumbai resulting in the death of a total of 175 people with more than 300 injured. After his arrest, he refused to take the services of Indian lawyers and demanded a lawyer from his country. Later on, getting no help from his country, the appellant was convinced to be represented by Indian lawyers. This appeal was raised against the order of the High Court which upheld the conviction order of the Trial Court. The Trial Court relying on the evidences, witnesses and his confessional statement convicted him and sentenced him to death. Contentions of the Appellant's Counsel Fair trial is an essential right of every person, which includes the right to be represe
Post a Comment
Read more