Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code was a section of the Indian Penal Code introduced in 1861 during the British rule of India. Modeled on the Buggery Act 1533, it made sexual activities "against the order of nature" illegal. On 6 September 2018, the Supreme Court of India ruled that the application of Section 377 to consensual homosexual sex ...
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.
[1] [2] However, other portions of Section 377 relating to sex with minors, non-consensual sexual acts, and bestiality remain in force. [4] While reading the judgment, the then Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra pronounced that the court found "criminalising carnal intercourse" to be "irrational, arbitrary and manifestly unconstitutional". [2]
Following the enactment of the One Hundred and Third Amendment Act of 2019, several writ petitions were filed, seeking to declare the amendment unconstitutional and in violation of the basic structure concept. By adding Articles 15(6) and 16(6) to the Indian Constitution, the state acquired the authority to impose specific restrictions on ...
R.F. Nariman. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India [1] is a judgement by a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India in 2015, on the issue of online speech and intermediary liability in India. The Supreme Court struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, relating to restrictions on online speech, as unconstitutional on ...
Legal experts have suggested that with this judgment, the judges have invalidated the reasoning behind the 2013 Judgement, thus laying the groundwork for Section 377 to be read down and the restoration of the 2009 High Court Judgement, thereby decriminalizing homosexual sex.
Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1986 AIR 180, 1985 SCR Supl. (2) 51) was a 1985 case in the Supreme Court of India.It came before the Court as a written petition by pavement and slum dwellers in Bombay (Now Mumbai), seeking to be allowed to stay on the pavements against their order of eviction during the monsoon months by the Bombay Municipal Corporation.
Constitution of India, Article 356. S. R. Bommai v. Union of India ( [1994] 2 SCR 644 : AIR 1994 SC 1918 : (1994)3 SCC1) is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India, [ 2] where the Court discussed at length provisions of Article 356 of the Constitution of India and related issues. This case had huge impact on Centre-State Relations.