Skip to main content


Showing posts from May, 2022

Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India & Ors

  Case Study Navtej Singh Johar vs Union of India & Ors By: Anjali Tiwari Facts of the case: Consensual sex between gays was classified as a "unnatural offence" under Section 377 of the IPC, and thus was made illegal. It discriminates against a minority primarily on the basis of their sexual orientation, which is similar to sex discrimination. In Suresh Kaushal and Anr Vs. NAZ Foundation and Ors, the section was challenged. It is claimed that it is in violation of Articles 14, 15, and 21 of the Constitution. In response, the Supreme Court issued an ambiguous ruling, indicating that the decision to decriminalize homosexuality should have been decided by Parliament rather than the courts. The courts can only do so if the statute is proven to be in violation of constitutional provisions beyond a reasonable doubt. Furthermore, the court stated that because fewer than 200 cases have emerged in 150 years, there is insufficient evidence to declare that section 377 IPC is ultra v

Article 22

  Article 22: Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases By: Anjali Tiwari 1) No person who is arrested should be held in custody without being notified of the grounds for his detention as quickly as possible, nor shall he be denied the opportunity to consult with and be defended by a lawyer of his choice. 2) Every person who is arrested and detained in custody must be brought before the nearest magistrate within twenty-four hours of their arrest, excluding the time required to travel from the place of arrest to the magistrate's court, and no such person may be held in custody beyond that time without the permission of a magistrate. 3) Clauses (1) and (2) do not apply to: (a) any person who is an enemy alien for the time being; or (b) any person who is arrested or imprisoned under any law requiring preventative detention. 4) No law authorizing preventive detention for more than three months shall be valid unless (a) an Advisory Board consisting of persons who are, or

Custodial Death And Violence

  Custodial Death And Violence The correlation of a topic on an established parameter that quantifies it in non-arbitrary terms is required in such cases, when the topic itself is unclear and ambiguous. Specifically, the measure of a person's right to life and liberty is derived from the 19th century English Concept of Rule of Law, which fluctuates in its application. In order to have a complete knowledge of the Rule of Law in relation to custodial death/violence, it is necessary to first grasp the fundamental concepts of the theory. The concept of Rule of Law originates with the unwritten constitution of the United Kingdom. Sir Edward Coke, who served as Chief Justice during James I's reign, was the one who first proposed the principle, which stated that the King should be considered a subject of the law and should be considered below the law. Prof. AV Dicey, in his work, The Law of the Constitution, mentions three postulates of the theory of the rule of law, which he attribut

Rights of surety in guarantee

 Rights of surety in guarantee A Surety's Obligations After completing a payment and relieving the principal debtor of his or her obligation, the surety is entitled to a number of benefits. These rights can be broken down into three categories: Principal debtors have legal recourse against them. The right to act as a guarantor on the payment of a debt, also known as the right of subrogation The right of subrogation indicates that, because the surety had provided a guarantee to the creditor and the creditor had left the scene after receiving payment, the surety will now treat the debtor as if he were a creditor in the same manner as the creditor. So the guarantor has the right to collect any money that he has paid to the creditor, including the main amount, charges, and interest that have accrued throughout the period of the guarantee. Indemnification is a legal right. In every contract of guarantee, there is an implied obligation by the principal debtor to indemnify the surety,

Historical School of Jurisprudence

  Historical school advocated that law is developed from social custom , economic needs, convention religious principle , and relations of the people living in a state. The advocates of this school argued that law is not made but is advanced from the pre-existence materials like customs and religious principles , unlike the natural school , which believed that law originates from superior authority or sovereignty . Historical School Of Jurisprudence- Concept and Meaning The jurist of this school believed that law should be changed with the changing need and nature of the person and they followed concept of man-made laws. Therefore, It would be seen that historical school developed as a stimuli to legal theories propounded by analytical positivists and the natural law philosophers. The latter states that the law was founded on the abstract notion of the human conscience and reason. The school rejected the idea of formation of law by judges and the origin from some divine relevance. Hist

Law and Morality

  Law and Morality To understand the relationship between Law and Morality, it is first necessary to understand what the terms Law and Morality mean. Law is not something that can be read and taken literally. The school of natural law interpreted law in relation to morality by using the term morality. It focused on what should be the rule rather than what is currently the law. They argued that law should be interpreted in terms of faith, morality, liberty, justice, and conscience, rather than merely in terms of the law. However, positivism characterised law as stressing that it is only subject to our own experiences. There is no connection between morality and the law. The law is the coming of the Sovereign that can be enforced through punishment.[1] Morality is a collection of principles that allow people to live together in communities. It's what societies deem right and appropriate Morality isn't set in stone. What you consider appropriate in your culture will not be accepta

Role of lawyers in justice delivery system

 ROLE OF LAWYERS IN JUSTICE DELIVERY SYSTEM By P.Hema A Lawyer is known as the officer of the court and hence he has more duties in order to make the justice system run smooth and help deliver speedy justice. The Bench and Bar relation is the must for professional development and therefore, an advocate is given a brief of how to balance the bench and bar relation in judiciary system. The development of lawyers as a class of professionals can be attributed to the need for trained persons who can form the competent interface to facilitate the interaction between the lay persons and the judiciary. This involves providing legal advice in matters of rights, liberties or property of the client within the framework of legislative and legal rights, and representing the client in the event of a dispute before an adjudicatory body. The primary duty of the lawyer is to inform the court as to the law and facts of the case and to aid the Court to do justice by arriving at correct conclusion. Since

Writ Jurisdiction

 Writ Jurisdiction Indian law consists of various writs which are issued by the Supreme court and High court. In earlier times these writs were used by English monarch to a specified person to undertake a specified action for eg; in the feudal era a military summons by the king to one of his tenants –in –chief to appear dressed for battle with retinue at a certain place and time. Writs are not only part of Indian laws but it is also a part of Canadian law, united kingdom, and Australian law. These writs were originated in the Anglo Saxon monarchy and consisted of a brief administrative order authenticated by a seal. In earlier times, these writs were used against the landlords by the king's chancellor when the vassal complaint about the injustice and the landlord didn't comply with the sheriff. William the Conqueror, took over the system unchanged. But he was unable to expand until Henry the second came and expanded the scope. Our constitution talks about the applicatio

Judicial Review

  Judicial Review India has 3 organs known the legislature, executive, and judiciary. Judiciary as the organ is independent whereas the rest of the organ is somewhere dependent on each other. Judiciary's task is to adjudicate controversies over the application of laws in a specific situation. The judiciary is also responsible for keeping a check on the rest of the organs this is known as judicial review. Judicial review can be defined as a procedure by which a court can review an administrative action by a public body and secure a declaration, order, or award. The actions which are against the constitution of the country are declared as void, this showcases that such a review depends upon the written constitution.  Judicial review was first discussed in the United States, in the case of Marbury v. Madison. The court ruled out that the newly elected president of that time and his secretary of the state, john madison was wrong to prevent William Marbury from being justice of the dist

actus dei nemini facit injuriam

  Actus Dei Nemini Facit Injuriam The Actus Dei Nemini Facit Injuriam states that "God 's action does not result in legal action against anyone". In other words, no one is responsible for anything beyond human ability. This includes any damage caused by unnatural forces, which will not be covered by law. It means that the law cannot place anyone who is guilty of an act of God which is ‘force majeure’. Likewise, no one can complain of any act of God because such an act is inevitable. Even any legal action or claim for compensation against the act of God will not be considered by the Court. The act of God is used as a defense tool in cases of torts where the situation is beyond the control of the defendant and the damage is caused by the forces of nature. In such a case, the defendant will not be liable for criminal law for such unintentional damages. Two key factors are required in the use of such defenses. First, there must be natural energy efficiency. Second, the occurr


                                 Defamation Defamation is that offence which is charged on people who try to or tend to create wrong opinion or image of any individual in the eyes of the public. It is a procedure which keeps the check and balance on the people who tend to harm the reputation of other people by keeping an eye on their Right to freedom of Speech and Expression as inculcated in Article 19 of the Constitution of India. To make sure that this does not happen, that is the reputation and image of the individual is not harmed, there are provisions under the Section 499 and Section 502 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 which talks about the defamation and the punishment awarded in this offence.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    

Actus Curiae Neminem Gravabit

  Actus Curiae Neminem Gravabit This policy has been considered important in the Indian justice system and law enforcement – that no one should suffer as a result of a court error or procedural delay – Busching Schmitz Private Limited Vs P.T. Menghani & Ors., MANU / SC / 0344/1977: AIR 1977 SC 1569: 1977 (2) SCC 835. A bench of 3 Judges in the Supreme Court ruled that if the Court in providing information erred on the plaintiff’s obligation, although not completely terminated, the Court was allocated at least. If the respondent acts on the basis of that information the courts will not be able to prosecute him or her for the misconduct. It went on to say that “there is no higher policy directed by the Court other than that no court action should injure a defendant and it is the responsibility of the courts to determine that if a person is harmed by an offense. Of the Court should be reinstated in a position he did not hold but because of that error. This is well summarized in the pr

Nervous Shock

                           Nervous Shock The meaning of nervous shock varies from subject to subject but according to the law of tort, it means an injury which is inflicted upon a person intentionally or by negligent actions or omissions of the other. Often, it is applied to psychiatric disorders which are obviously ‘inaccurate’ and ‘bad’ in eyes of law as it disturbs the individual mentally and can cause serious problems. For the act to be considered as ‘Nervous Shock’ in the law of torts, some requisites are there in order which has to be established before. They are: At a place or situation where the duty of care exists. There is a breach of that duty. The casual link between the breach of the duty and the nervous shock is established. Where the shock was not too remote a consequence. Historically, there was no statutory law which defines the term nervous shock or the punishment or provisions regarding that. The offence of nervous shock has been emerged and evolved in Indian Law by