Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Indian Judicial Collegium system, where existing judges appoint judges to the nation's constitutional courts, has its genesis in, and continued basis resting on, three of its own judgments made by Supreme Court judges, which are collectively known as the Three Judges Cases. The collegium system has often been alleged to have caste bias due ...
Maharaj Libel Case. The Maharaj Libel Case was an 1862 trial in the Bombay High Court in the Bombay Presidency, British India. The case was filed by Jadunathjee Brajratanjee Maharaj, against Nanabhai Rustomji Ranina and Karsandas Mulji. The case was filed because of an editorial article which they published accusing the Vallabhacharya and ...
Y. V. Chandrachud (Chief Justice) Concur/dissent. P. N. Bhagwati. Minerva Mills Ltd. and Ors. v. Union Of India and Ors. (case number: Writ Petition (Civil) 356 of 1977; case citation: AIR 1980 SC 1789) [ 1] is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India [ 2] that applied and evolved the basic structure doctrine of the Constitution of India.
The Uniform Civil Code is a proposal in India to formulate and implement personal laws of citizens which apply on all citizens equally regardless of their religion. Currently, personal laws of various communities are governed by their religious scriptures. [ 1] Personal laws cover marriage, divorce, inheritance, adoption and maintenance.
Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru & Ors. v. State of Kerala & Anr. (Writ Petition (Civil) 135 of 1970), also known as the Kesavananda Bharati judgement, was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India that outlined the basic structure doctrine of the Indian Constitution. [ 1] The case is also known as the Fundamental Rights Case.
Justices K.N. Wanchoo, Vishistha Bhargava and G.K Mitter (writing together); R.S. Bachawat; V. Ramaswami. Golaknath v. State Of Punjab (1967 AIR 1643, 1967 SCR (2) 762), or simply the Golaknath case, was a 1967 Indian Supreme Court case, in which the Court ruled that Parliament could not curtail any of the Fundamental Rights in the Constitution.
India is the world's largest democracy and with this ruling has joined the United States, Canada, South Africa, the European Union, and the UK in recognizing this fundamental right. [ 11 ] However, as the curative petition (challenging Section 377) is currently sub-judice, the judges authored that they would leave the constitutional validity to ...
Status: In force. Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 is an Act of the Parliament of India enacted by the NDA government to prevent money laundering and to provide for confiscation of property derived from money laundering. [ 1][ 2] PMLA and the Rules notified thereunder came into force with effect from 1 July 2005.