👨‍⚖️ Fali S. Nariman, Constitutional lawyer and jurist, passes away -

Landmark Cases —
http://t.me/iv?url=https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-law/fali-s-nariman-passes-away-notable-cases-9172865/&rhash=1398b799d706ac

Brief reminiscences of his life- https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/constitutional-lawyer-and-jurist-fali-s-nariman-passes-away/article67869719.ece,

Personal Opinion -
One Day all of us (legal associates) will have to die but we should be satisfied with our good work as in this case I am sure Nariman sir was not disappointed by his contribution to the legal fraternity, your work is remembered even after your life.

Judicial Decision Does Not Infringe Fundamental Rights : Supreme Court
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/judicial-decision-does-not-infringe-fundamental-rights-supreme-court-250128

Supreme Court has no power of superintendence over High Courts

Dismissing the writ petition, the Supreme Court observed :

"There is no provision in Chapter-IV (titled The Union Judiciary) under Part-V (The Union) of the Constitution of India which, in terms similar to Article 227 of the Constitution (Power of superintendence over all courts by the High Court) under Chapter-V thereof, confers power of superintendence on the Supreme Court over the High Courts."

💡The Court referred to the precedent in

Tirupati Balaji Developers (P) Ltd. Vs. State of Bihar 2004

which held that in our constitutional scheme there is a clear division of jurisdiction between the two institutions (Supreme Court and High Courts) and both the institutions need to have mutual respect for each other.

The Court noted that it has been laid down in Naresh Shridhar Mirajkar Vs. State of Maharashtra that "a judicial decision rendered by a Judge of competent jurisdiction ( jurisdiction due to writ of certiorari and prohibition in Article 32) in or in relation to a matter brought before him does not infringe a Fundamental Right."

#case_brief —

Ganpat @ Ganapat v. State of Uttar Pradesh 2024

@CurrentLegalGK

👨‍⚖️ National Anthem rules

It is not possible to give an exhaustive list of occasions on which the singing (as distinct from playing) of the Anthem can be permitted. But there is no objection to the singing of the Anthem accompanied by mass singing so long as it is done with due respect as a salutation to the motherland and proper decorum is maintained.

@CurrentLegalGK

Supreme Court Explains Scope Of Judicial Interference In Arbitral Awards
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/supreme-court-clarifies-arbitrator-authority-contract-terms-interpretation-arbitral-awards-arbitration-conciliation-act-238496

The Bench distinguished between the concepts of justice and morality. When an Award shocks the conscience of the court, for example where the claimant has restricted his claim but the arbitral tribunal has awarded a higher amount without any reasonable ground of justification, that would be against justice. However, morality would cover illegal and unenforceable agreements but interference would be only if warranted if something shocks the court’s conscience

A Brothel 'Customer' Doesn't Procure Woman For Commercial Purposes; Can't Punish Him Under 'Immoral Traffic Prevention Act': Allahabad HC
https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/allahabad-high-court/allahabad-high-court-brothel-customer-procure-woman-commercial-purposes-punish-immoral-traffic-prevention-act-250241

🌟 Rights of Sex Workers

https://t.me/CurrentLegalGK/1291

Important Concepts or topic's Articles

@CurrentLegalGK

✍️ Artificial Intelligence - Importance in Indian Judiciary

Basic #essay Material

More: https://t.me/CurrentLegalGK/2930

@CurrentLegalGK

🌅 #Quote

"Justice under our Constitution must mean the right to expect fair treatment from an administrative authority; and, if not, the right to approach a court for redressal. Justice cannot be an empty promise,"


~ Jijabhai dashrath shinde v. Maharastra, 2024

☺️ How to find Ratio decidendi?

@CurrentLegalGK

🔆On the Right of maintenence for divorce Muslim women

The Supreme Court is set to decide if divorced Muslim women can claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), challenging the precedence of secular laws over personal laws.

Section 125 CrPC allows for the maintenance of destitute wives, children, and parents, including divorced women who haven't remarried.

The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, provides maintenance to divorced Muslim women only during the iddat period, with the Supreme Court's previous rulings expanding rights beyond this period.

Discussion revolves around the non-obstante clause in Section 3 of the 1986 Act, which does not explicitly bar alternative relief under Section 125 CrPC, sparking a need for an authoritative pronouncement.

@CurrentLegalGK

👨‍⚖️👨‍⚖️ Regional Benches of Supreme court

@CurrentLegalGK

Master Of Roster Business Should Be Dealt By First 3 Judges: Former SC Judge Justice Kurian Joseph
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/cjar-seminar-master-of-roster-business-be-dealt-by-first-3-judges-former-justice-kurian-joseph-250376

Currently by CJI/CJ/DJ

Now, the trend in the Supreme Court is that if a case is posted before a bench, people are able to predict what the result is," he said.

Solution- More Diversity in Constitutional benches, remove arbitrary act of master of roaster by 3 senior judges.

🌟 Read them-
https://t.me/CurrentLegalGK/1594
https://t.me/CurrentLegalGK/2178
https://t.me/CurrentLegalGK/1557

Imp- https://t.me/CurrentLegalGK/1564

Donor gametes are allowed: what the new rule on surrogacy says 🔗
#surrogacy_bill