#Supreme Court of India

[gold-dust-angel]

Good to see this trending even though I have no idea why suddenly today but—

A historic debate on marriage equality and legalising same-sex marriage is underway in the Supreme Court of India. The Union govt. is against it of course but the SC judges and the lawyers representing the petitioners are very progressive. The recordings of the live hearings are up on youtube and worth watching because the arguments in favor are just ✨chef's kiss✨ The verdict is yet to be out but I'm really hopeful. Anxious but hopeful. So far the CJI's statements point to a positive outcome for the queer community but let's wait and watch. It's gonna be epic🌈

[wordsifelt]

Anyone else been watching the marriage equality case as it's been proceeding? (For those who don't know, the supreme court of india has been debating the legalization of same sex and trans marriage rights).

The petitioners made a pretty convincing case (according to me atleast). It's the turn of the other side now. Hopefully soon all Indians will have the right to marry whoever we want irrespective of gender.

[indizombie]

The rich minerals in Adivasi lands are being looted by the government and private companies. The Supreme Court has declared 214 out of the 219 Coal-Blocks in the country illegal and ordered their closure and levied a fine on them for their illegal mining. But the central and state governments have found a way out by re-allotting these illegal mines through auction to make it look legal! A lot of assurances are given that Adivasi land will not be given to industrialists, yet at the same time, mines in Scheduled Areas are being allotted to government and private companies.

'I am not a Silent Spectator', Stan Swamy

[tomorrowusa]

While the Trump Republican US Supreme Court restricted abortion rights earlier this year, India’s Supreme Court has just expanded them. 

India's Supreme Court has said that all women, including those not married, could get an abortion up to 24 weeks.

The court ruling came on a plea seeking clarity on the amended 2021 abortion law which listed several groups that did not include single women.

The court said all women, regardless of their marital status, were entitled to safe and legal abortion.

It said that excluding single women in consensual relationships would be "unconstitutional".

A reminder that abortion is on the ballot in the 2022 midterm elections.

Voting Democratic supports abortion rights. Voting Trump Republican or failing to vote leads to more restrictions on abortion.

Register and vote. And you must register at your new address if you’ve moved since the last time you voted – even if you just moved down the block.

I Will Vote

[seemabhatnagar]

 "Inheritance Equality and Muslim Law: A Legal Conundrum”

Tarsem v. Dharma & 2 others

Civil Appeal 2497 - 2498/2024

Before the Supreme Court of India

Heard by Hon'ble Mr. Justice C T Ravikumar J & Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal J

#inheritancerights #muslimlaw #restrictionsonwill #supremecourtofindia

I wanted to share some thoughts on an important legal matter which is expected to be addressed by the Apex Court on July 25, 2024.

The issue touches on #Constitutional and #Islamiclaw in India.

Here are the key points:

1. Equality in Succession for Muslim Women: The question arises whether Muslim women have the right to claim equal inheritance under Articles 14 and 15 of the Indian Constitution, especially in light of Article 44 which aims for a uniform civil code.

2. Testator Rights Under Muslim Law: Can a Muslim, governed by Islamic law, be entitled to execute a Will of his entire estate left, according to his wish?

3. Limitations on Wills in Muslim Law: Can a Muslim may execute a will to the extent of one-third of his estate in favor of any or all of his legal heirs without the need for consent from other heirs?

Under Islamic law, a Muslim can distribute property through gifts, wakf (charitable endowment), or a will. However, there are restrictions:

A will can only dictate the distribution of up to one-third of the total property.

Beyond this one-third, the consent of the legal heirs is required.

The one-third limit is calculated after settling debts and funeral expenses.

In the current case, the late Hazi's will, favors three of his sons—Dharma, Gulzar, and Karam Chand—excluding Tarsem.

As per Islamic Law, the testator can bequeath one-third of his estate to a third party, with the remaining two-thirds going to the legal heirs equally, unless the heirs consent to a different distribution.

[ganganews]

कुछ तो असाधारण है अरविंद केजरीवाल में, कोर्ट का ऐतिहासिक असाधारण फैसला।

[sasusakucore]

I hate my country's Supreme Court so much. These judges deserve the deepest pits of hell for saying that in a country which is said to be one of the worst countries for women especially for married women, who face high rate of rape, abuse and death at the hands of their husbands and his family, women are misusing the law(which is a blatant lie). These judges would be the same judges that will justify marital rape. No wonder our country is a hell for women. And also Indian MRAs deserve to rot painfully along these judges for spreading misogynistic lies about laws that protect Indian women.

[life-and-health-insurance]

Supreme Court Slam Private Hospitals Loots

Big news! Supreme Court wants to regulate prices for heart surgery (and potentially more) in India! Does this mean the same cost in private and government hospitals?

The video dives into the Clinical Establishment Act of 2010 and the recent Supreme Court ruling. ⚖️ Will it impact quality in private hospitals? Share your thoughts in the comments!

[advabhisheksinha]

WRITS AT THE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA

REMEDIES FOR ENFORCEMENT OF RIGHTS CONFERRED BY THIS PART

1) The right to move the Supreme Court by appropriate proceedings for the enforcement of the rights conferred by this part is guaranteed.

2) The Supreme Court shall have power to issue directions or orders or writs including within the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari whichever may be appropriate, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by this part.

3) Without prejudice to the powers conferred on the Supreme Court by clauses (1) & (2), Parliament may by Law empower any other Court to exercise within local limits of its jurisdiction all or any of the powers exercisable by the Supreme Court under Clause (2).

4) The right guaranteed by this article shall not be suspended except as otherwise provided for by this Constitution.

Transfer Petition, Special Leave Petition, Supreme Court Lawyer, Advocate, Delhi, AOR, Delhi High Court, Bombay High Court, Advocate for Supreme Court Case, SLP, Bail, Supreme Court Lawyer Bombay, WRIT, Constitutional Law

[werindialive]

EC to release the electoral bond details in time, reads the statement from the Chief Election Commissioner

Chief Election Commissioner Rajiv Kumar on Wednesday said that very soon Election Commission will disclose all details on electoral bonds. The statement from the head of the poll panel chief came after the State Bank of India deposited all the details about electoral bonds to the EC on Tuesday.

“In compliance with the Hon’ble Supreme Court's directions to the SBI, contained in its order dated Feb 15 & March 11, 2024 (in the matter of WPC NO.880 of 2017), data on electoral bonds has been supplied by State Bank of India to Election Commission of India, today, March 12, 2024,” a statement read from the chief of EC.

As per the directive of the Supreme Court, the poll panel must publish all the details of the electoral bonds on its website by the 15th of March. The State Bank of India in a compliance affidavit filed all the details with the apex court. This affidavit contains details of all the electoral bonds purchased and redeemed between April 12, 2019, and February 15 this year.

Earlier, a bench of 5 judges rejected the plea from SBI seeking a 5-day extension in the deadline for submission of electoral bond details. “The SBI has to just open the sealed cover, collate the details, and give the information to the EC,” the bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud had said.

“In the last 26 days, what steps have you taken? Your application is silent on that," the bench had asked SBI.

For latest national news India in Hindi, subscribe to our newsletter.

[rightnewshindi]

Electoral Bond: सुप्रीम कोर्ट बार एसोसिएशन ने की अपने अध्यक्ष की निंदा, कहा, पत्र लिखने के लिए नही किया था अधिकृत

Electoral Bond: सुप्रीम कोर्ट बार एसोसिएशन ने की अपने अध्यक्ष की निंदा, कहा, पत्र लिखने के लिए नही किया था अधिकृत

Supreme Court Bar Association: सुप्रीम कोर्ट बार एसोसिएशन (एससीबीए) ने अपने अध्यक्ष आदिश सी. अग्रवाल द्वारा राष्ट्रपति द्रौपदी मुर्मू को लिखे उनके उस पत्र में व्यक्त विचारों की निंदा की है जिसमें उनसे चुनावी बॉण्ड योजना मामले में शीर्ष अदालत के फैसले पर राष्ट्रपति संदर्भ लेने का आग्रह किया गया है। अग्रवाल के विचारों से खुद को अलग करते हुए बार निकाय की कार्यकारी समिति ने 12 मार्च को जारी अपने…

[infovikaspandey]

Vikas Pandey Advocate

[wordsifelt]

Tomorrow morning, our Supreme Court will release their verdict for the marriage equality case. 🤞 fingers crossed all my fellow Indian queers.

[kdsheladiya-blog]

Thiruvengadam Pillai v Navaneethammal and Anr (2008) 4 SCC 530.

Indian Stamps Act,1899, S.54: Stamp Papers – Use of old stamp papers i.e., stamp paper purchased more than six months prior to proposed date of execution may certainly be a circumstance that can be used as a piece of evidence to cast doubt on authenticity of agreement but that cannot be clinching evidence to invalidate the agreement. [ S.47, Indian Evidence Act , 1872 , S.45, 73 ] In this case…

[prabodhjamwal]

Interpreting UAPA Bail Provisions: Is Supreme Court Setting The Clock Back?

“Factual matrix of the case is an eloquent, but tragically ignored, plea for repeal of a law which criminalises right to speech and association” Kavita Srivastava*, Dr V Suresh** The Supreme Court in its ruling on 7th February, 2024 in `Gurvinder Singh v State of Punjab’ held that its own well-developed jurisprudence that “Bail is the rule and jail the exception” will not apply to those charged…

[seemabhatnagar]

The Supreme Court Strikes Down the Unconstitutional Resolution of the Mysore Bar Association

Rupashree H R v The State of Karnataka & others

WP Civil 538/2019

Before Supreme Court of India

The matter was heard by the Division Bench of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vikram Nath J & Hon’ble Mr. Justice   Satish Chandra Sharma J

Order

The Apex Court quashed the resolution of Mysore Bar Association prohibiting members of the Bar from filing Vakalatnama on behalf of the present petitioner.

Fact

In the present Writ Petition Resolution of the Mysore Bar Association dt.16.03.2019 was challenged.

It was resolved by the Association that no member of the Association shall file Vaqalatnama on behalf of the present petitioner.

The matter is pending since 2019 and despite repeated notice, the Mysore Bar Association did not enter appearance.

The Apex Court stayed the Resolution of the Association vide its order dt. 06.10.2021.

On 14.11.2022 notices to Respondent no. 3(Association) were served through the Commissioner of Police, Mysore but despite the same, Association has not put in appearance.

Hence, the Apex Court proceeded Ex Parte.

Observation of the Apex Court

Such a Resolution could not have been passed.

Right to defend oneself is a Fundamental Right under Part III of the Constitution of India.

Right to appear for a client is also a Fundamental Right being a part of carrying on one’s profession as a lawyer.

As such, the said Resolution is hereby quashed.

Seema Bhatnagar