๐Place of worship an unsettling dispute
โ The Supreme Court's reference to the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, in the Babri Masjid case highlighted the Act's importance in preserving the religious character of places of worship as they existed on 15 August 1947, reinforcing secular values and constitutional commitment to non-retrogression.
โ Despite the Act, there has been a surge in petitions challenging the religious character of places of worship, notably the Gyanvapi Masjid and the Shahi Idgah Masjid, reflecting efforts to overturn historical religious sites.
โ The Courts' responses to petitions challenging the Places of Worship Act and remarks by the Chief Justice of India have sparked concerns about judicial silence and the potential breach of trust, raising questions about the Act's future and its role in maintaining secularism and public peace.
@CurrentLegalGK
โ The Supreme Court's reference to the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, in the Babri Masjid case highlighted the Act's importance in preserving the religious character of places of worship as they existed on 15 August 1947, reinforcing secular values and constitutional commitment to non-retrogression.
โ Despite the Act, there has been a surge in petitions challenging the religious character of places of worship, notably the Gyanvapi Masjid and the Shahi Idgah Masjid, reflecting efforts to overturn historical religious sites.
โ The Courts' responses to petitions challenging the Places of Worship Act and remarks by the Chief Justice of India have sparked concerns about judicial silence and the potential breach of trust, raising questions about the Act's future and its role in maintaining secularism and public peace.
@CurrentLegalGK
๐4โค2๐ฅ1๐1
๐ฅ
Waise MPCJ wale dikh nahi rhe, lagta hai aaj ghar me shaant baithe hai โบ๏ธ๐
(Don't worry we are with you ๐ jo hota hai acha hi hota hai)
Last time scores nahi bheje the, is baar bhejdena healthy competitive spirit intact reheti hai ๐
@CurrentLegalGK
Haryana Mock Test Solve kroge?Waise MPCJ wale dikh nahi rhe, lagta hai aaj ghar me shaant baithe hai โบ๏ธ๐
(Don't worry we are with you ๐ jo hota hai acha hi hota hai)
Last time scores nahi bheje the, is baar bhejdena healthy competitive spirit intact reheti hai ๐
@CurrentLegalGK
๐4๐1
๐จโโ๏ธ๐
3 criminal laws discussions by eminent jurists and lawyers.
https://www.youtube.com/live/D8Kz2QAsc2o?feature=shared
@CurrentLegalGK
LET'S WATCH IT LIVE3 criminal laws discussions by eminent jurists and lawyers.
https://www.youtube.com/live/D8Kz2QAsc2o?feature=shared
@CurrentLegalGK
YouTube
DISCUSSION: DECODING THE NEW CRIMINAL LAWS
#livelaw #LegalNews #CurrentAffairs #LawAndOrder #HumanRights #Equality #SocialJustice #LegalJustice #CivilRights #JudicialMatters #LegalUpdates #LegalAnalysis #TopicalIssues #PublicInterest #EqualityBeforeLaw #RuleOfLaw #livelaw #bail #ed #legalupdates #legalawernessโฆ
๐2๐1
โ ๏ธ Results are Out
Check out ๐
Check out ๐
๐ค2
๐๐ผ๐พ๐ธ๐ โ๐โโ๐ผโ๐ ๐ธ๐ฝ๐ฝ๐ธ๐โ๐ ๐น๐ช- โ๐๐ฅ๐ฆ๐ฃ๐๐ ๐๐ฆ๐ค๐ฅ๐๐๐ โข
โ ๏ธ Results are Out Check out ๐
Are sorry vo 6th standard ka result Aya hai galat jagah forward kar Diya message.
Maafi chahenge ๐
Maafi chahenge ๐
๐ข5๐3
Manipur High Court Deletes Earlier Direction To Consider Inclusion Of Meiteis In ST List
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/manipur-high-court-withdrawn-direction-meiteis-inclusion-st-list-250174
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/manipur-high-court-withdrawn-direction-meiteis-inclusion-st-list-250174
www.livelaw.in
Manipur High Court Deletes Earlier Direction To Consider Inclusion Of Meiteis In ST List
In a significant development, the Manipur High Court on Wednesday (February 21) modified its 2023 order in part, whereby a contentious direction was issued to the State government for considering...
๐1
SC terms woman military officerโs 1988 discharge โillegalโ: How courts have ruled for women in armed forces ๐
#explained_law #express_explained #indian_military #ssc
#explained_law #express_explained #indian_military #ssc
The Indian Express
SC terms woman military officerโs 1988 discharge โillegalโ: How courts have ruled for women in armed forces
Former permanent commissioned officer Lt. Selina John, of the Military Nursing Service (MNS), was released from employment in 1988 on grounds of her marriage. How has the SC batted for women in the forces earlier?
๐ฅ2
๐๐ผ๐พ๐ธ๐ โ๐โโ๐ผโ๐ ๐ธ๐ฝ๐ฝ๐ธ๐โ๐ ๐น๐ช- โ๐๐ฅ๐ฆ๐ฃ๐๐ ๐๐ฆ๐ค๐ฅ๐๐๐ โข
SC terms woman military officerโs 1988 discharge โillegalโ: How courts have ruled for women in armed forces ๐ #explained_law #express_explained #indian_military #ssc
๐จโโ๏ธ๐ฎโโ๏ธSecretary, Ministry of Defence vs. Babita Puniyaโ
The court said that seeking a Permanent Commission or a full-length career was โjustifiedโ.
Before the ruling, only male SSC officers could opt for permanent commission after 10 years of service. Hence, women could not qualify for a government pension, which is conferred only after 20 years of service as officers.
Earlier this month, a division bench of the Punjab and Haryana HC ruled that MNS officers cannot be denied ex-serviceman status under the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules, 1982. Under this, officers who were released from service on completion of their term with a gratuity (as SSC officers do), are categorised as ex-servicemen.
The court said that seeking a Permanent Commission or a full-length career was โjustifiedโ.
Before the ruling, only male SSC officers could opt for permanent commission after 10 years of service. Hence, women could not qualify for a government pension, which is conferred only after 20 years of service as officers.
Earlier this month, a division bench of the Punjab and Haryana HC ruled that MNS officers cannot be denied ex-serviceman status under the Punjab Recruitment of Ex-Servicemen Rules, 1982. Under this, officers who were released from service on completion of their term with a gratuity (as SSC officers do), are categorised as ex-servicemen.
Analysing The Dynamic Effects Of Registration In Trademark Infringement In Light Of Dr. Reddys Laboratories Ltd. V. Fast Cure Pharma
https://www.livelaw.in/articles/dynamic-effects-registration-trademark-infringement-dr-reddys-laboratories-fast-cure-pharma-250149
https://www.livelaw.in/articles/dynamic-effects-registration-trademark-infringement-dr-reddys-laboratories-fast-cure-pharma-250149
www.livelaw.in
Analysing The Dynamic Effects Of Registration In Trademark Infringement In Light Of Dr. Reddys Laboratories Ltd. V. Fast Cure Pharma
Recently, the Delhi High Court in Dr. Reddys Laboratories Ltd.v. Fast Cure Pharma[1] ruled that โTrademark Rectification Petition can be filed in any High Court within whose jurisdiction the...
๐๐ผ๐พ๐ธ๐ โ๐โโ๐ผโ๐ ๐ธ๐ฝ๐ฝ๐ธ๐โ๐ ๐น๐ช- โ๐๐ฅ๐ฆ๐ฃ๐๐ ๐๐ฆ๐ค๐ฅ๐๐๐ โข
Analysing The Dynamic Effects Of Registration In Trademark Infringement In Light Of Dr. Reddys Laboratories Ltd. V. Fast Cure Pharma https://www.livelaw.in/articles/dynamic-effects-registration-trademark-infringement-dr-reddys-laboratories-fast-cure-pharmaโฆ
๐จโโ๏ธ๐ฅ Dr. Reddys Laboratories Ltd. v. Fast Cure Pharma 2023
Sections 47, 57, and 124 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 talk about the revocation, rectification, and the procedural hearing of such trademark suits.
Issues- the contention before the court was whether the said petition of removal and rectification would lie to the Delhi High Court, where the infringement took place, or to the Calcutta High Court, where the trademark of the respondent was registered. Therefore, the issue of territorial jurisdiction was presented before the court
The court, following the principle of โest exclusio alteriusโ, observed that the Trademark Act of 1999 neither expressly approves nor excludes any High Court from taking up the matter related to alteration under sections 47, 57 and 124. Also, going by the general definition of the โHigh Courtโ under the General Clauses Act, the court negated the claim that only the Calcutta High Court would have jurisdiction over the case.
Dynamic Effects of Registration
The principle of the dynamic effect of registration basically embodies that the jurisdiction would not be limited to the territoriality of the registration. It states that since the substantial matter in the case includes the issue of registration as well as the infringement of the trademark, a dynamic approach has to be taken to resolve it. Therefore, rather than sticking to the principle of territorial jurisdiction of registration, the dynamic effect also allows the trademark owner to file the suit for the infringement, where the actual infringement took place
The court relied on the case of Girdhari Lal Gupta v. K. Gian Chand & Co[3], wherein it was held that โthe application could be made either before the High Court having jurisdiction over the office of the Controller of Designs which granted registration to the design or any High Court within whose jurisdiction the โdynamic effectโ of the registration could be felt.
@CurrentLegalGK
Sections 47, 57, and 124 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 talk about the revocation, rectification, and the procedural hearing of such trademark suits.
Issues- the contention before the court was whether the said petition of removal and rectification would lie to the Delhi High Court, where the infringement took place, or to the Calcutta High Court, where the trademark of the respondent was registered. Therefore, the issue of territorial jurisdiction was presented before the court
The court, following the principle of โest exclusio alteriusโ, observed that the Trademark Act of 1999 neither expressly approves nor excludes any High Court from taking up the matter related to alteration under sections 47, 57 and 124. Also, going by the general definition of the โHigh Courtโ under the General Clauses Act, the court negated the claim that only the Calcutta High Court would have jurisdiction over the case.
Dynamic Effects of Registration
The principle of the dynamic effect of registration basically embodies that the jurisdiction would not be limited to the territoriality of the registration. It states that since the substantial matter in the case includes the issue of registration as well as the infringement of the trademark, a dynamic approach has to be taken to resolve it. Therefore, rather than sticking to the principle of territorial jurisdiction of registration, the dynamic effect also allows the trademark owner to file the suit for the infringement, where the actual infringement took place
The court relied on the case of Girdhari Lal Gupta v. K. Gian Chand & Co[3], wherein it was held that โthe application could be made either before the High Court having jurisdiction over the office of the Controller of Designs which granted registration to the design or any High Court within whose jurisdiction the โdynamic effectโ of the registration could be felt.
@CurrentLegalGK
โค3๐1๐ฏ1
BREAKING| Ex-SC Judge Justice AM Khanwilkar Appointed As Lokpal Chairperson
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/ex-sc-judge-justice-am-khanwilkar-appointed-as-lokpal-chairperson-250674
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/ex-sc-judge-justice-am-khanwilkar-appointed-as-lokpal-chairperson-250674
www.livelaw.in
Ex-SC Judge Justice AM Khanwilkar Appointed As Lokpal Chairperson
The President of India has appointed former Supreme Court judge Justice AM Khanwilkar has been ap
๐๐ผ๐พ๐ธ๐ โ๐โโ๐ผโ๐ ๐ธ๐ฝ๐ฝ๐ธ๐โ๐ ๐น๐ช- โ๐๐ฅ๐ฆ๐ฃ๐๐ ๐๐ฆ๐ค๐ฅ๐๐๐ โข
BREAKING| Ex-SC Judge Justice AM Khanwilkar Appointed As Lokpal Chairperson https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/ex-sc-judge-justice-am-khanwilkar-appointed-as-lokpal-chairperson-250674
๐ฎโโ๏ธ๐ฐ Lokpal has jurisdiction over central government to inquire into allegations of corruption against its public functionaries including the Prime Minister, cabinet ministers, members of parliament, Group A officials of the Central Government and for matters connecting them.
๐ The Lok Pal and Lok Ayuktas Act was passed in 2013. As per Section 4 of the Act, the Chairperson and Members shall be appointed by the President after obtaining the recommendations of a Selection Committee consisting ofโ
(a) the Prime MinisterโChairperson;
(b) the Speaker of the House of the PeopleโMember;
(c) the Leader of Opposition in the House of the PeopleโMember;
d) the Chief Justice of India or a Judge of the Supreme Court nominated by himโMember;
(e) one eminent jurist, as recommended by the Chairperson and Members referred to in clauses (a) to (d) above, to be nominated by the PresidentโMember.
1๏ธโฃ The first Lok Pal Chairperson, Justice PC Ghose, was appointed in March 2019. Justice Pradip Kumar Mohnaty has been officiating as the Acting Chairperson of Lok Pal since May 2022
๐จโโ๏ธ At the Supreme Court, Justice Khanwilkar was part of several Constitution judgments such as the decriminalisation of homosexuality, Sabarimala women entry, validty of Aadhaar etc. He also led the bench which upheld the exoneration of Narendra Modi in the 2002 riots case, upheld the validity of the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and FCRA amendments.
@CurrentLegalGK
๐ The Lok Pal and Lok Ayuktas Act was passed in 2013. As per Section 4 of the Act, the Chairperson and Members shall be appointed by the President after obtaining the recommendations of a Selection Committee consisting ofโ
(a) the Prime MinisterโChairperson;
(b) the Speaker of the House of the PeopleโMember;
(c) the Leader of Opposition in the House of the PeopleโMember;
d) the Chief Justice of India or a Judge of the Supreme Court nominated by himโMember;
(e) one eminent jurist, as recommended by the Chairperson and Members referred to in clauses (a) to (d) above, to be nominated by the PresidentโMember.
1๏ธโฃ The first Lok Pal Chairperson, Justice PC Ghose, was appointed in March 2019. Justice Pradip Kumar Mohnaty has been officiating as the Acting Chairperson of Lok Pal since May 2022
๐จโโ๏ธ At the Supreme Court, Justice Khanwilkar was part of several Constitution judgments such as the decriminalisation of homosexuality, Sabarimala women entry, validty of Aadhaar etc. He also led the bench which upheld the exoneration of Narendra Modi in the 2002 riots case, upheld the validity of the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and FCRA amendments.
@CurrentLegalGK
๐4๐3๐ฏ2โค1
๐๐ผ๐พ๐ธ๐ โ๐โโ๐ผโ๐ ๐ธ๐ฝ๐ฝ๐ธ๐โ๐ ๐น๐ช- โ๐๐ฅ๐ฆ๐ฃ๐๐ ๐๐ฆ๐ค๐ฅ๐๐๐ โข
๐ฎโโ๏ธ๐ฐ Lokpal has jurisdiction over central government to inquire into allegations of corruption against its public functionaries including the Prime Minister, cabinet ministers, members of parliament, Group A officials of the Central Government and for mattersโฆ
๐๐จ Which was the 1st case on handcuffing restraints also what are the new provisions related to handcuffing under BNSS, 2023
#Question
@CurrentLegalGK
๐1
Indiaโs continued refusal to ratify U.N. Convention Against Torture lacks substance โ The Leaflet
https://theleaflet.in/indias-continued-refusal-to-ratify-u-n-convention-against-torture-lacks-substance/
Human rights of prisoners, accused.
https://theleaflet.in/indias-continued-refusal-to-ratify-u-n-convention-against-torture-lacks-substance/
Human rights of prisoners, accused.
The Leaflet
Indiaโs continued refusal to ratify U.N. Convention Against Torture lacks substance โ The Leaflet
NHRC's radio silence on the absence of express definition of torture in Indian law and jurisprudence is deafening.
๐1