Net Deals Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Section 377 - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_377

    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 ...

  3. Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navtej_Singh_Johar_v...

    [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]

  4. Collegium system - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collegium_system

    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 ...

  5. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shreya_Singhal_v._Union_of...

    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 ...

  6. Supriyo v. Union of India - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supriyo_v._Union_of_India

    The Indian Succession Act of 1925 governs the succession for the marriage registered under Special Marriage Act unless both parties are Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist or Jain. The Supreme Court reviewed the gendered language in the Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act of 1956 in Githa Hariharan v. Reserve Bank of India (1999).

  7. Minerva Mills v. Union of India - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minerva_Mills_v._Union_of...

    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.

  8. Right to Privacy verdict - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_Privacy_verdict

    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. [12] [13]

  9. Mohori Bibee v Dharmodas Ghose - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohori_Bibee_v_Dharmodas_Ghose

    Decision by. Sir Ford North. Keywords. Contract law, minority, mortgage. Mohori Bibee v Dharmodas Ghose, [1903] UKPC 12, is a major Indian contract law case decided by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council. The case held that a contract entered into by a minor is totally void. [ 1]