Explained Interview | Unpacking the National Sports Governance Bill, now in Lok Sabha 🔗
#explained_sports #express_explained

With process to remove Justice Yashwant Varma now likely in Parliament, how impeachment works 🔗
#explained_law #express_explained #impeachment

Employment Bonds validity Judgment

#ICA@CurrentLegalGK @CurrentLegalGK

Vijaya Bank v. Prashant B narnaware.

#ICA@CurrentLegalGK

'SC's 'Tehseen Poonawalla' Directives Binding On State & Centre; Can't Monitor Mob Lynching Incident In PIL': Allahabad HC
https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/allahabad-high-court/allahabad-high-court-mob-lynching-pil-monitor-govt-jamiat-ulema-tehseen-poonawalla-directives-supreme-court-298709

#Question@CurrentLegalGK

Is there any system like separation of powers in the grassroot level democracy such as present in State and Union level. Comment.

👨‍⚖️👩‍⚖️ Special Courts v. Tribunals.

#Difference@CurrentLegalGK

M Siddiq (D) Thr Lrs …
v.
Mahant Suresh Das & Ors

Deity as juristic personality.
1. Perpetual minor.
2. Validity of contracts?
3. Law of limitation

@CurrentLegalGK

I share judgments after researching a lot on the topic.

Though you may find similar law laid down in many judgments but I try to find the most authoritative judgment for you.

Use the channel wisely it is not a copy paste channel.

We might in future start our YT videos as well and then you will receive video explanations as well, though it will take time but will be extremely beneficial.

@CurrentLegalGK

https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/jammu-kashmir-ladakh-high-court-mens-rea-offence-company-strict-vicarious-liability-human-agency-section-482-crpc-223573


"No doubt, the company being a corporate entity performs its functions through its officers including Chairman, Managing Director, Directors etc. However, it is trite position of criminal jurisprudence that no vicarious liability can be attached to said officers unless statute specifically provides so", t

Our Criminal Justice System Starts With Arrest & Ends With Bail; There's No Conviction Mostly : Justice Joymalya Bagchi
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-criminal-justice-system-starts-with-arrest-ends-with-bail-no-trial-conviction-justice-joymalya-bagchi-gangster-cases-298775

Heirship Certificate, Probate & Letter Of Administration – A Simple Legal Guide For Families Dealing With Succession
https://www.livelaw.in/know-the-law/heirship-certificate-probate-and-letter-of-administration-under-indian-succession-act-298782

🕉️ JURISTIC PERSONALITY OF IDOLS


1. History and meaning of legal personality:
From not recognising natural persons in law (during dark ages) to now recognising inanimate objects as legal person we have evolved historically. legal person can be group of natural persons or an inanimate object. to be a legal person is to possess certain rights and duties
under the law and to be capable of engaging in legally enforceable relationships with other legal persons.

2. The rights and liabilities that attach upon the object conferred with
juristic personality, must be determined keeping in mind the specific reasons for which such legal personality was conferred. The limits or boundaries of the rights ascribed to the new legal person must be guided by the reasons for conferring legal personality.

3. In Hinduism, physical
manifestations of the Supreme Being exist in the form of idols to allow
worshippers to experience a shapeless being. The idol is a representation of the Supreme Being. The idol, by possessing a physical form is identifiable.

4. Salmond's work on legal personality is authoritatively recognised.
such as distinction between object/corpus and the legal personality, the object is conferred rights but ultimately it is representing the interests and benefit of natural person.

4. Rationale behind the concept of juristic person.
History: Not based on strict rules but creation of history due to peculiar facts before courts and leading to absurd perverse findings so legal innovation needed. necessity and convenience: The conferral of legal personality on objects has historically been a powerful tool of policy to ensure the practical adjudication of claims.

5. For practical purposes the juristic personality is conferred on idol, not on devotees as collectively due to many idols, and also to avoid the alienation or mismanagement, of property gifted for pious purposes, by shebait for other purposes.
(originated case: Manohar Ganesh Tambekar v Lakhmiram Govindram, 1888)

6. Can a land itself be recognised as juristic person (manifestation of god) ( eg. ram janmbhoomi) No because of (a) A novel argument but not the purpose of conferring juristic person pretection of pious purpose can be achieved without recognising it. (b) It would open floodgates to future litigations (c) Constitutionally diverse methods recognised but absolute ownership over another religion is recognised by merits not by methods of religion.

7. It is an established position that a deity cannot on the ground of being a perpetual minor stand exempted from the application of the
Limitation Act. (adverse possession ✓)

8. A Hindu idol exists for its own interest as
well as for the interests of its worshippers but a minor does not exist for the interests of anybody else.

9. The Contract Act (Substantive law) has taken away the legal capacity of a minor to contract but the legal capacity of a Hindu idol to contract has not been affected by this Act or by any other statute.

10. It is the shebait that enjoys the exclusive right to sue on behalf of the deity. (but when shebait acts negligently then worshipper may also sue in personal capacity to declare acts of shebait null and void and stay them and sometimes to gain full remedy on behlaf of idol (a shebait is not a pujari he must exercise continuosly all the duties and rights properly for the purpose of property conferred to idol and not prejudicially to idol for being recognised as shebait).

On Evidence law:

The law recognises that within the standard of preponderance of probabilities, there could be different degrees of probability. This was succinctly summarized by Denning, LJ in Bater v Bater ,where he formulated the principle thus :
―So also in civil cases, the case must be proved by a preponderance of probability, but there may be degrees of
probability within that standard. The degree depends on that
subject matter.

Interestingly even rivers are recognised as legal person in various cases (Mohd. Salim v State of Uttarakhand 2017)

#Basics@CurrentLegalGK
#Mybrief@CurrentLegalGK

🤔 How's life going RJS aspirants?

I hope everything is great 😎

Edit: Abhi to Heartbreak nahi fire emoji, and 'ready' in comments bolne wali spirit honi chahiye 😉.

@CurrentLegalGK

👨‍⚖️👨‍🎓👩‍🎓 Sukdeb Saha Guidelines (my creation :⁠-)

Suicide prevention 15 pointers guidelines.

Mental health is an integral component of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. This Court has, in a consistent line of precedents, affirmed that the right to life does not mean mere animal existence, but a life of dignity,
autonomy, and well-being. Mental health is central to
this vision. In Shatrughan Chauhan v. Union of India and Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India , this Court recognised mental integrity, psychological autonomy, and freedom from degrading treatment as essential facets of human
dignity under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Further, the Mental Healthcare Act, reinforces this constitutional mandate by recognising every person’s right to access mental healthcare and protection from inhuman or
degrading treatment in mental health settings. Section 18 of the MH Act guarantees mental health services to all.


@CurrentLegalGK

Assam CJ 2025 PRE Question Paper

#MCQ@CurrentLegalGK

In which of the following Judgments, the Supreme Court has overturned the Asian Resurfacing Judgment which mandated that the interim orders passed by High Courts staying trials in civil and criminal cases would automatically expire after six months from the date of the order, unless extended by the High Courts ?

[a] High Court Bar Association Delhi vs. Union of India

[b] High Court Bar Association Allahabad vs. Union of India

[c] High Court Bar Association Jabalpur vs. Union of India

[d] High Court Bar Association Lucknow vs. Union of India

#MCQ@CurrentLegalGK

In which of the following recent cases, the Supreme Court brought officers under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances [NDPS] Act, 1985 within the ambit of 'Police Officers' under Section 25, of the Indian Evidence Act [Now, Section 23 of Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam]?

[a] Ram Singh vs. Central Bureau of Investigation

[b] Surjit Singh vs. Union of India

[c] Rajaram Jaiswal vs. State of Bihar

[d] Toofan[sic] Singh v. State of Tamilnadu

#MCQ@CurrentLegalGK

The principle of res gestae as a rule of evidence is embedded in:

[a] Section 6 of the Evidence Act and Section 5 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam

[b] Section 5 of the Evidence Act and Section 4 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam

[c] Section 4 of the Evidence Act and Section 6 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam

[d] Section 6 of the Evidence Act and Section 4 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam