Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Judgement Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India [22] 1978 A 'procedure' under Article 21 of the Constitution cannot be arbitrary, unfair, oppressive, or unreasonable. A law depriving a person of 'personal liberty' must not violate any of the Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. This judgement thus overruled A. K. Gopalan v.
Judgment is the final reasoned decision of the Court as to the guilt or innocence of the accused. Where the accused is found guilty, the judgment must also contain an order requiring the accused to undergo punishment or treatment. Every court must deliver the judgement in the language of that court as determined by the State Government.
In a significant judgment on 4 January, the Delhi High Court held a police officer guilty of contempt of court for arresting a man in violation of the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case Arnesh Kumar vs State of Bihar. The Court sentenced the police officer to one-day imprisonment for contempt of court.
[2] [7] [5] However, in later judgements including the Danial Latifi v. Union of India case and Shamima Farooqui v. Shahid Khan, the Supreme Court of India interpreted the act in a manner reassuring the validity of the case and consequently upheld the Shah Bano judgement, and The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act 1986 was ...
Upload file; Special pages; Permanent link; Page information; Cite this page; Get shortened URL; Download QR code; Print/export Download as PDF; Printable version; In ...
K. M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra; Court: Supreme Court of India: Full case name: K. M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra: Case history; Prior actions: Jury's Judgment for defendant, Jury() Trial-Charge-Misdirection-Reference by Judge, High Court Conviction under Sec.302 of the Indian Penal Code
The case came up for hearing before a bench comprising Chief Justice Ajit Prakash Shah and Justice S. Muralidhar, and the judgment was delivered on 2 July 2009. [9] The Court located the rights to dignity and privacy within the right to life and liberty guaranteed by Article 21 (under the fundamental Right to Freedom charter) of the Constitution, and held that criminalization of consensual gay ...
Suresh Kumar Koushal & Anr. v. NAZ Foundation & Ors. (2013) is a case in which a 2 judge Supreme Court bench consisting of G. S. Singhvi and S. J. Mukhopadhaya overturned the Delhi High Court case Naz Foundation v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and reinstated Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.