Tag: fundamental rights

Supreme Court: TET Mandatory for All Teachers, But RTE Act’s Application to Minority Schools Under Scrutiny
6Oct By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court: TET Mandatory for All Teachers, But RTE Act’s Application to Minority Schools Under Scrutiny

This Supreme Court judgment holds that the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) is a mandatory qualification for the appointment and promotion of all teachers under the RTE Act. However, the Bench expressed doubts about the correctness of the precedent in Pramati which exempts all minority institutions from the RTE Act, and has referred this specific constitutional question for reconsideration by a larger bench. Facts Of The Case: This set of civil appeals originated from conflicting judgments of the Bombay and Madras High Courts concerning the applicability of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009, and specifically the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), to minority educational institutions. The appellants included minority educational institutions, state authorit...
Read More
A New Lease on Life: Supreme Court Allows Death Penalty Review Based on New Mitigation Guidelines
29Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

A New Lease on Life: Supreme Court Allows Death Penalty Review Based on New Mitigation Guidelines

This Supreme Court judgment holds that its extraordinary power under Article 32 of the Constitution can be invoked to reopen the sentencing stage in death penalty cases that have attained finality. This is permissible to remedy a clear breach of the procedural safeguards for individualized sentencing mandated in Manoj v. State of M.P., which are integral to the fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 21. The Court clarified that such judicial declarations operate retrospectively. Facts Of The Case: The case concerns the petitioner, Vasanta Sampat Dupare, who was convicted and sentenced to death for the 2008 kidnapping, sexual assault, and murder of a four-year-old girl in Nagpur. His conviction and death sentence were confirmed by the High Court in 2012 and ultimately upheld by the Supr...
Read More
Mens Rea is Must: Supreme Court Rules Accused Must Intend to Drive Victim to Suicide for Abetment Charge
19Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Mens Rea is Must: Supreme Court Rules Accused Must Intend to Drive Victim to Suicide for Abetment Charge

The Supreme Court reiterated that to establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 IPC, there must be clear evidence of mens rea and a proximate act of instigation by the accused, which directly led the deceased to commit suicide. Mere allegations of harassment, without positive action intended to push the victim toward suicide, are insufficient to sustain the charge. The absence of a live link between the alleged acts and the suicide warranted quashing of the FIR. Facts Of The Case: A seven-term independent Member of Parliament committed suicide on 22 February 2021, leaving behind a suicide note. In the note, he named several officials from the administration and police of Dadra and Nagar Haveli, accusing them of conspiring to defame, degrade, and demean him to end his political caree...
Read More
Supreme Court: 20-Year Life Sentence Means Release After 20 Years, No Remission Needed
16Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court: 20-Year Life Sentence Means Release After 20 Years, No Remission Needed

The Supreme Court ruled that a "life imprisonment" sentence specifying a fixed term of "actual imprisonment without remission" is a determinative sentence. Upon completing that fixed term, the convict is entitled to automatic release and need not apply for remission. Any detention beyond this period violates Article 21 of the Constitution. Facts Of The Case: Sukhdev Yadav was convicted for the 2002 murder of Nitish Katara, alongside Vikas and Vishal Yadav. In 2015, the Delhi High Court, while upholding his life sentence, specifically modified it to "life imprisonment which shall be 20 years of actual imprisonment without consideration of remission." This fixed-term sentence was later affirmed by the Supreme Court. Sukhdev Yadav completed this mandated 20-year period of actual inc...
Read More
Supreme Court’s Big Equality Ruling :Army Can’t Restrict Women’s Numbers After Allowing Them In
12Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court’s Big Equality Ruling :Army Can’t Restrict Women’s Numbers After Allowing Them In

This Supreme Court judgment holds that once the Central Government permits women's induction into the JAG branch via notification under Section 12 of the Army Act, 1950, it cannot subsequently impose gender-based restrictions through administrative policies. Any such limitation violates Article 14, 15, and 16 of the Constitution, as it constitutes indirect discrimination and exceeds the permissible scope of exceptions under Article 33. Facts Of The Case: The petitioners, two female candidates who secured the 4th and 5th ranks in the women's merit list for the Judge Advocate General (JAG) branch's 31st Course, challenged a recruitment notification dated 18th January 2023. The notification prescribed six vacancies for male candidates and only three for female candidates. Despite the petiti...
Read More
Beyond Impeachment: Supreme Court Validates Its Internal Mechanism for Judicial Misconduct
9Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Beyond Impeachment: Supreme Court Validates Its Internal Mechanism for Judicial Misconduct

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the 'In-House Procedure' for investigating allegations of judicial misconduct. It ruled that the mechanism, which can recommend a judge's removal, is a valid exercise of the CJI's authority under the Judges (Protection) Act, 1985, and does not violate the constitutional scheme for impeachment. Facts Of The Case: In March 2025, a fire broke out in the store-room of a Delhi High Court judge's official bungalow while he was away. During efforts to douse the flames, officials discovered burnt currency notes on the premises. This discovery raised serious suspicions of misconduct, potentially violating the values outlined in the Restatement of Judicial Life. Consequently, the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court sought an explanation from the ...
Read More
Supreme Court Orders End to ‘Forced Labour’ in Matheran, Directs Rehabilitation Scheme
6Sep By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Orders End to ‘Forced Labour’ in Matheran, Directs Rehabilitation Scheme

The Supreme Court prohibited hand-pulled rickshaws in Matheran, declaring the practice a violation of Article 23 of the Constitution as it constitutes forced labour and offends human dignity. It directed the state to rehabilitate pullers by providing e-rickshaws through a welfare scheme, balancing ecological concerns with the constitutional mandate of social and economic justice. Facts Of The Case: The case concerns the eco-sensitive hill station of Matheran in Maharashtra, renowned as a pedestrian-only zone. The primary issues involved whether paver blocks could be laid on the main road to prevent soil erosion and if hand-pulled rickshaws, a long-standing mode of transport, could be replaced with battery-operated e-rickshaws. The state government and the Matheran Municipal Council...
Read More
When Protest Isn’t Nuisance: Supreme Court Explains Limits of Police Power, Quashes 5-Year-Old Case
28Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

When Protest Isn’t Nuisance: Supreme Court Explains Limits of Police Power, Quashes 5-Year-Old Case

The Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings, applying the Bhajan Lal principles. It held that the allegations, even if accepted entirely, did not prima facie constitute the offences under Sections 290, 341, 171F IPC, and Section 34 of the Police Act, 1861, as their essential ingredients were absent. Continuing the prosecution was deemed an abuse of the process of law. Facts Of The Case: During the 2019 General Elections, the Model Code of Conduct was in force in Andhra Pradesh. On March 22, 2019, appellants Manchu Mohan Babu, an educational institution chairman, and his son, along with staff and students, conducted a rally and dharna on the Tirupati-Madanapalli Road. They were protesting the state government's failure to provide student fee reimbursements. The gathering, which las...
Read More
Supreme Court Upholds National Fraternity: Teaching Experience Across India Counts
26Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds National Fraternity: Teaching Experience Across India Counts

The Supreme Court held that a government notification extending the retirement age must be interpreted purposively, and a condition requiring "10 years of teaching experience in any State-aided university" includes experience from universities outside the state. Excluding such experience was found to be an arbitrary and discriminatory classification violating the right to equality under Article 14. Facts Of The Case: The appellant was initially appointed as a teacher in a government college in Assam in 1991, where he served for 16 years. In 2007, he was selected for a non-teaching post at Burdwan University, West Bengal, based on his qualifications and experience, and was later promoted in 2012. In 2021, the State of West Bengal issued a notification increasing the retirement age from 60...
Read More
Supreme Court: Jail Overcrowding Can’t Be a Ground for Granting Bail in Heinous Crimes
25Aug By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court: Jail Overcrowding Can’t Be a Ground for Granting Bail in Heinous Crimes

The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in granting bail without properly considering the absence of "new circumstances" as mandated by the Court's earlier judgment cancelling bail. The impugned order lacked cogent reasoning, relied on irrelevant factors like jail overcrowding, and failed to accord due deference to the Supreme Court's previous decision, warranting its quashing. Facts Of The Case: The case involves an appeal by the informant, Ajwar, against an order of the Allahabad High Court granting bail to the accused, Waseem. Waseem was charged under various sections of the IPC, including Section 302 (murder). His bail was initially granted by the High Court in 2022 but was cancelled by the Supreme Court. A subsequent grant of bail by the High Court was again cancelled by th...
Read More