• Sign In/Sign Up
  • Menu
  • +Clients Back

    • Get Free Legal Answers
    • Get Fee Estimates
    • Find Lawyers
  • +Lawyers

    • Case Diary & Office Manager
    • Post News & Artilces
    • Post Jobs & Internships
  • +Law Students

    • Campus Ambassadors
    • Find Jobs & Internships
    • Post News & Articles
    • Resource Sharing
  • +Law Schools

    • Post Admissions
    • Post Opportunities
    • Get Law School Rating

  • Home
  • Post Articles
  • Devotion Cannot Be Subjected To Gender Discrimination, SC Allows Women Entry In Sabarimala By 4:1 Majority

Latest Articles

Back

Devotion Cannot Be Subjected To Gender Discrimination, SC Allows Women Entry In Sabarimala By 4:1 Majority

Courtesy/By: SANJEEV SIROHI  |  23 Oct 2018     Views:3780

It has to be exclaimed right at the start with considerable degree of satisfaction that in one of the most landmark judgment that Supreme Court which is the highest court in India has delivered since independence which has garnered not just national headlines but also international headlines, the Apex Court on September 28, 2018 in Indian Young Lawyers Association & Ors v The State of Kerala & Ors in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 373 of 2006 by a 4:1 majority in one of the most keenly awaited judgment has very laudably permitted entry of women of all age groups to the Sabarimala temple, holding that ‘devotion cannot be subjected to gender discrimination’. It is one of the most progressive and path breaking judgment that we have witnessed in last many decades just like in the Shayara Bano case where Supreme Court not long time back had upheld triple talaq as unconstitutional! Very rightly so!

                                   Be it noted, the lone women in the Bench, Justice Indu Malhotra, dissented. Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice RF Nariman, Justice AM Khanwilkar and Justice DY Chandrachud constituted the majority. The Bench was delivering this landmark and laudable judgment in a 2006 PIL filed by Indian Young Lawyers Association challenging the centuries-old tradition of Sabrimala Temple banning entry of women of menstruating age inside the temple. Why do we forget that even in temples of Lord Hanuman who as per mythological beliefs was a bachelor yet no women of any age has ever been stopped from entering his temple and even Muslims and people from other religions are not barred from paying their respect to him if anyone of them so desire?

                                 At the very outset, this landmark  judgment written by the CJI Dipak Misra for himself and Justice AM Khanwilkar notes that, “The irony that is nurtured by the society is to impose a rule, however unjustified, and proffer explanation or justification to substantiate the substratum of the said rule. Mankind, since time immemorial, has been searching for explanation or justification to substantiate a point of view that hurts humanity. The theoretical human values remain on paper. Historically, women have been treated with inequality and that is why, many have fought for their rights. Susan B Anthony, known for her feminist activity, succinctly puts, “Men, their rights, and nothing more; women, their rights, and nothing less.” It is a clear message.”

                               More importantly, para 2 then rightly touches the raw nerve by pointing out clearly and categorically that, “Neither the said message nor any kind of philosophy has opened up the large populace of this country to accept women as partners in their search for divinity and spirituality. In the theatre of life, it seems, man has put the autograph and there is no space for a woman even to put her signature. There is inequality on the path of approach to understand the divinity. The attribute of devotion to divinity cannot be subjected to the rigidity and stereotypes of gender. The dualism that persists in religion by glorifying and venerating women as goddesses on one hand and by imposing rigorous sanctions on the other hand in matters of devotion has to be abandoned. Such a dualistic approach and an entrenched mindset results in indignity to women and degradation of their status. The society has to undergo a perceptual shift from being the propagator of hegemonic patriarchal notions of demanding more exacting standards of purity and chastity solely from women to be the cultivator of equality where the woman is in no way considered frailer, lesser or inferior to man. The law and the society are bestowed with the Herculean task to act as levellers in this regard.”

            Continuing in the same vein, para 3 then minces no words in saying that, “Any relationship with the Creator is a transcendental one crossing all socially created artificial barriers and not a negotiated relationship bound by terms and conditions. Such a relationship and expression of devotion cannot be circumscribed by dogmatic notions of biological or physiological factors arising out of rigid socio-cultural attitudes which do not meet the constitutionally prescribed tests. Patriarchy in religion cannot be permitted to trump over the element of pure devotion borne out of faith and the freedom to practise and profess one’s religion. The subversion and repression of women under the garb of biological or physiological factors cannot be given the seal of legitimacy. Any rule based on discrimination or segregation of women pertaining to biological characteristics is not only unfounded, indefensible and implausible but can also never pass the muster of constitutionality.”

                                 Going forward, para 4 then enunciates that, “It is a universal truth that faith and religion do not countenance discrimination but religious practices are sometimes seen as perpetuating patriarchy thereby negating the basic tenets of faith and of gender equality and rights. The societal attitudes too centre and revolve around the patriarchal mindset thereby derogating the status of women in the social and religious milieu. All religions are simply different paths to reach the Universal One. Religion is basically a way of life to relaize one’s identity with the Divinity. However, certain dogmas and exclusionary practices and rituals have resulted in incongruities between the true essence of religion or faith and its practice that has come to be permeated with patriarchal prejudices. Sometimes, in the name of essential and integral facet of the faith, such practices are zealously propagated.”        

                                          It cannot be lost on us that para 5 then observes that, “Having stated so, we will focus on the factual score. The instant writ petition preferred under Article 32 of the Constitution seeks issuance of directions against the Government of Kerala, Devaswom Board of Travancore, Chief Thanthri of Sabarimala Temple and the District Magistrate of Pathanamthitta to ensure entry of female devotees between the age group of 10 to 50 years to the Lord Ayyappa Temple at Sabarimala (Kerala) which has been denied to them on the basis of certain custom and usage; to declare Rule 3(b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Act, 1965 (for brevity, “the 1965 Act”) as unconstitutional being violative of Articles 14, 15, 25 and 51A(e) of the Constitution of India and further to pass directions for the safety of women pilgrims.”

                                     It would be pertinent to mention here that para 6 then illustrates that, “The three-Judge Bench in Indian Young Lawyers Association and others v. State of Kerala and others, (2017) 10 SCC 689, keeping in view the gravity of the issues involved, sought the assistance of Mr. Raju Ramachandran and Mr. K. Ramamoorthy, learned senior counsel as Amici Curiae. Thereafter, the three-Judge Bench analyzed the decision and the reasons ascribed by the Kerala High Court in S. Mahendran v. The Secretary, Travancore Devaswom Board, Thiruvananthapuram and others AIR 1993 Kerala 42 wherein similar contentions were raised. The Bench took note of the two affidavits dated 13.11.2007 and 05.02.2016 and the contrary stand taken therein by the Government of Kerala.” Para 9 says that, “It is also worthy to note here that the Division Bench of the High Court of Kerala, in S. Mahendran (supra), upheld the practice of banning entry of women belonging to the age group of 10 to 50 years in the Sabarimala temple during any time of the year.”

                                  Having said this, let us now turn to see what Para 95 enunciates. It says that, “Though, the respondents have urged that the pilgrims coming to visit the Sabarimala temple being devotees of Lord Ayyappa are addressed as Ayyappans and, therefore, the third condition for a religious denomination stands satisfied, is unacceptable. There is no identified group called Ayyappans. Every Hindu devotee can go to the temple. We have also been apprised that there are other temples for Lord Ayyappa and there is no such prohibition. Therefore, there is no identified sect. Accordingly, we hold, without any hesitation, that Sabarimala temple is a public religious endowment and there are no exclusive identified followers of the cult.”

                                       To put things in perspective, para 96 then stipulates that, “Coming to the first and the most important condition for a religious denomination, i.e., the collection of individuals ought to have a system of beliefs or doctrines which they regard as conducive to their spiritual well-being, there is nothing on record to show that the devotees of Lord Ayyappa have any common religious tenets peculiar to themselves, which they regard as conducive to their spiritual well-being, other than those which are common to the Hindu religion. Therefore, the devotees of Lord Ayyappa are just Hindus and do not constitute a separate religious denomination. For a religious denomination, there must be new methodology provided for a religion. Mere observance of certain practices, even though from a long time does not make it a distinct religion on that account.”

                                      It is then brought out in para 97 that, “Having stated that the devotees of Lord Ayyappa do not constitute a religious denomination within the meaning of Article 26 and that Sabarimala Temple is a public temple by virtue of the fact that Section 15 of the 1950 Act vests all powers of direction, control and supervision over it in the Travancore Devaswom Board which, in our foregoing analysis, has been unveiled as ‘other authority’ within the meaning of Article 12, resultantly fundamental rights including those guaranteed under Article 25(1) are enforceable against the Travancore Devaswom Board and other incorporated Devaswoms including the Sabarimala Temple.”

                                    Now coming to para 100, it clearly and categorically says that. “The right guaranteed under Article 25(1) has nothing to do with gender or, for that matter, certain physiological factors, specifically attributable to women. Women of any age group have as much a right as men to visit and enter a temple in order to freely practise a religion as guaranteed under Article 25(1). When we say so, we are absolutely alive to the fact that whether any such proposed exclusion of women from entry into religious places form an essential part of a religion would be examined at a subsequent stage.”

                                    As it turned out, para 101 then spares no punches in explicitly stating that, “We have no hesitation to say that such an exclusionary practice violates the right of women to visit and enter  a temple to freely practice Hindu religion and to exhibit devotion towards Lord Ayyappa. The denial of this right to women significantly denudes them of their right to worship. We concur with the view of the Amicus Curiae, learned senior counsel, Mr. Raju Ramachandran, that the right guaranteed under Article 25(1) is not only about inter-faith parity but it is also about intra-faith parity. Therefore, the right to practise religion under Article 25(1) in its broad contour, encompasses a non-discriminatory right which is equally available to both men and women of all age groups professing the same religion.”

                      Simply put, para 104 then elucidates that, “Therefore, it can be said without any hesitation or reservation that the impugned Rule 3(b) of the 1965 Rules, framed in pursuance of the 1965 Act, that stipulates exclusion of entry of women of the age group of 10 to 50 years, is a clear violation of the right of such women to practice their religious belief which, in consequence, makes their fundamental right under Article 25(1) a dead letter. It is clear as crystal that as long as the devotees, irrespective of their gender and/or age group, seeking entry to a temple of any caste are Hindus, it is their legal right to enter into a temple and offer prayers. The women, in the case at hand, are also Hindus and so, there is neither any viable nor any legal limitation on their right to enter into the Sabarimala Temple as devotees of Lord Ayyappa and offer their prayers to the deity.”

                                      It was also clarified in para 105 that, “When we say so, we may also make it clear that the said rule of exclusion cannot be justified on the ground that allowing entry to women of the said age group would, in any way, be harmful or would play a jeopardizing role to public order, morality, health or, for that matter, any other provision/s of Part III of the Constitution, for it is to these precepts that the right guaranteed under Article 25(1) has been made subject to.”

                                 Needless to say, it is then underscored in para 110 that, “The right guaranteed under Article 25(1) has been made subject to, by the opening words of the Article itself, public order, morality, health and other provisions of Part III of the Constitution. All the three words, that is order, morality and health are qualified by the word ‘public’. Neither public order nor public health will be at peril by allowing entry of women devotees of the age group of 10 to 50 years into the Sabarimala temple for offering their prayers. As regards public morality, we must make it absolutely clear that since the Constitution was not shoved, by any external force, upon the people of this country but was rather adopted and given by the people of this country to themselves, the term public morality has to be appositely understood as being synonymous with constitutional morality.” Para 111 then seeks to make it clear that, “Having said so, the notions of public order, morality and health cannot be used as colourable device to restrict the freedom to freely practise religion and discriminate against women of the age group of 10 to 50 years by denying them their legal right to enter and offer their prayers at the Sabarimala temple for the simple reason that public morality must yield to constitutional morality.”

                          Conclusion

                              In a nutshell, it is then observed in para 144 that, “In view of our aforesaid analysis, we record our conclusions in seriatim:

(i)             In view of the law laid down by this Court in Shirur Mutt (supra) and S.P. Mittal (supra), the devotees of Lord Ayyappa do not constitute a separate religious denomination. They do not have common religious tenets peculiar to themselves, which they regard as conducive to their spiritual well-being, other than those which are common to the Hindu religion. Therefore, the devotees of Lord Ayyappa are exclusively Hindus and do not constitute a separate religious denomination.

(ii)          Article 25(1), by employing the expression ‘all persons’, demonstrates that the freedom of conscience and the right to freely profess, practise and propagate religion is available, though subject to the restrictions delineated in Article 25(1) itself, to every person including women. The right guaranteed under Article 25(1) has nothing to do with gender or, for that matter, certain physiological factors specifically attributable to women.

(iii)       The exclusionary practice being followed at the Sabrimala temple by virtue of Rule 3(b) of the 1965 Rules violates the right of Hindu women to freely practise their religion and exhibit their devotion towards Lord Ayyappa. This denial denudes them of their right to worship. The right to practise religion under Article 25(1) is equally available to both men and women of all age groups professing the same religion.

(iv)       The impugned Rule 3(b) of the 1965 Rules, framed under the 1965 Act, that stipulates exclusion of entry of women of the age group of 10 to 50 years, is a clear violation of the right of Hindu women to practise their religious beliefs which, in consequence, makes their fundamental right of religion under Article 25(1) a dead letter.

(v)          The term ‘morality’ occurring in Article 25(1) of the Constitution cannot be viewed with a narrow lens so as to confine the sphere of definition of morality to what an individual, a section or religious sect may perceive the term to mean. Since the Constitution has been adopted and given by the people of this country to themselves, the term public morality in Article 25 has to be appositely understood as being synonymous with constitutional morality.     

(vi)       The notions of public order, morality and health cannot be used as colourable device to restrict the freedom to freely practise religion and discriminate against women of the age group of 10 to 50 years by denying them their legal right to enter and offer their prayers at the Sabarimala temple.

(vii)    The practice of exclusion of women of the age group of 10 to 50 years being followed at the Sabarimala Temple cannot be regarded as an essential part as claimed by the respondent Board.

(viii)  In view of the law laid down by this Court in the second Ananda Marga case, the exclusionary practice being followed at the Sabarimala Temple cannot be designated as one, the non-observance of which will change or alter the nature of Hindu religion. Besides, the exclusionary practice has not been observed with unhindered continuity as the Devaswom Board had accepted before the High Court that female worshippers of the age group of 10 to 50 years used to visit the temple and conducted poojas in every month for five days for the first rice feeding ceremony of their children.

(ix)       The exclusionary practice, which has been given the backing of a subordinate legislation in the form of Rule 3(b) of the 1965 Rules, framed by the virtue of the 1965 Act, is neither an essential nor an integral part of the religion.

(x)          A careful reading of Rule 3(b) of the 1965 Rules makes it luculent that it is ultra vires both Section 3 as well as Section 4 of the 1965 Act, for the simple pure reason that Section 3 being a non-obstante provision clearly stipulates that every place of public worship shall be open to all classes and sections of Hindus, women being one of them, irrespective of any custom or usage to the contrary.

(xi)       Rule 3(b) is also ultra vires Section 4 of the 1965 Act as the proviso to Section 4(1) creates an exception to the effect that the regulations/rules made under Section 4(1) shall not discriminate, in any manner whatsoever, against any Hindu on the ground that he/she belongs to a particular section or class.

(xii)    The language of both the provisions, that is, Section 3 and the proviso to Section 4(1) of the 1965 Act clearly indicate that custom and usage must make space to the rights of all sections and classes of Hindus to offer prayers at places of public worship. Any interpretation to the contrary would annihilate the purpose of the 1965 Act and incrementally impair the fundamental right to practise religion guaranteed under Article 25(1). Therefore, we hold that Rule 3(b) of the 1965 Rules is ultra vires of the 1965 Act.”

                                         As things stand, Justice RF Nariman in his separate but concurring judgment too strongly backed the majority judgment that Sabarimala custom must yield to fundamental right of women to worship. He also rightly pointed out that although the rights claimed by the Thantri and the believers in the custom of the temple have protection under Article 25(1), the right of a woman believer is also protected under Article 25(1), and her right should prevail over the right to maintain the exclusionary custom.  

                                              Interestingly enough, Justice RF Nariman while concluding in para 32 notes that, “I, therefore, concur in the judgment of the learned Chief Justice of India in allowing the writ petition, and declare that the custom or usage of prohibiting women between the ages of 10 to 50 years from entering the Sabarimala temple is violative of Article 25(1), and violative of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Act, 1965 made under Article 25(2)(b) of the Constitution. Further, it is also declared that Rule 3(b) of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Rules, 1965 is unconstitutional being violative of Article 25(1) and Article 15(1) of the Constitution of India.”

                                            It is notable that another eminent Judge Dr DY Chandrachud also concurred with the majority judgment. He held in para 119 that, “I hold and declare that:

1)  The devotees of Lord Ayyappa do not satisfy the judicially enunciated requirements to constitute a religious denomination under Article 26 of the Constitution;

2)  A claim for the exclusion of women from religious worship, even if it be founded in religious text, is subordinate to the constitutional values of liberty, dignity and equality. Exclusionary practices are contrary to constitutional morality;

3) In any event, the practice of excluding women from the temple at Sabarimala is not an essential religious practice. The Court must decline to grant constitutional legitimacy to practices which derogate from the dignity of women and to their entitlement to an equal citizenship;

4) The social exclusion of women, based on menstrual status is a form of untouchability which is an anathema to constitutional values. Notions of “purity and pollution”, which stigmatize individuals, have no place in a constitutional order;

5) The notifications dated 21 October 1955 and 27 November 1956 issued by the Devaswom Board, prohibiting the entry of women between the ages of ten and fifty, are ultra vires Section 3 of the Kerala Hindu Places of Public Worship (Authorisation of Entry) Act 1965 and are even otherwise unconstitutional; and

6) Hindu women constitute a ‘section of class’ of Hindus under clauses (b) and (c) of Section 2 of the 1965 Act. Rule 3(b) of the 1965 Rules enforce a custom contrary to Section 3 of the 1965 Act. This directly offends the right of temple entry established by Section 3. Rule 3(b) is ultra vires the 1965 Act.

                            Before concluding, it must be brought out that there was only one dissenting Judge – Indu Malhotra. Ironically, she was the only women Judge in the five-Judge Bench who delivered this landmark judgment. She summarized her analysis as follows in para 16:

1.  The Writ Petition does not deserve to be entertained for want of standing. The grievances raised are non-justiciable at the behest of the Petitioners and Intervenors involved herein.

2.  The equality doctrine enshrined under Article 14 does not override the Fundamental Right guaranteed by Article 25 to every individual to freely profess, practise and propagate their faith, in accordance with the tenets of their religion.

3.  Constitutional Morality in a secular polity would imply the harmonisation of the Fundamental Rights, which include the right of every individual, religious denomination, or sect, to practise their faith and belief in accordance with the tenets of their religion, irrespective of whether the practise is rational or logical.

4.  The Respondents and the Intervenors have made out a plausible case that the Ayyappans or worshippers of the Sabarimala Temple satisfy the requirements of being a religious denomination, or sect thereof, which is entitled to the protection provided by Article 26. This is a mixed question of fact and law which ought to be decided before a competent court of civil jurisdiction.

5.  The limited restriction on the entry of women during the notified age group does not fall within the purview of Article 17 of the Constitution.

6.  Rule 3(b) of the 1965 Rules is not ultra vires Section 3 of the 1965 Act, since the proviso carves out an exception in the case of public worship in a temple for the benefit of any religious denomination or sect thereof, to manage their affairs in matters of religion.                     

                                          All said and done, it is one of the most landmark, laudable and progressive judgment that I have ever read in recent times. This alone explains why most of the Judges barring Justice Indu Malhotra have been all unanimous in deciding that women aged between age group of 10 to 50 years should not be barred from entering Sabarimala temple in any way and are fully entitled to go there. No politics should be done over it but politicians love to dabble in everything and support this worst discrimination against women even while talking about providing women equality in all spheres! This landmark judgment must be implemented in letter and spirit and all devotees and politicians must appreciate that they have to respect this final judgment delivered by the highest court of our country which is the Supreme Court and should refrain from stopping the interested women devotees from having a darshan of the holy Sabarimala shrine! Those who feel aggrieved by this judgment have every right to go for review petition but no one has the right to take law in their hands and stop women from entering the holy shrine as permission has been granted to them by the top court of India that is the Supreme Court! 


Courtesy/By: SANJEEV SIROHI  |  23 Oct 2018     Views:3780

Articles Updates

Supreme Court Greenlights Sub-Classification of SC...
20 Sep 2024     Views:559
Post-Merger Vision: HDFC Bank to Prioritize Profit...
01 Aug 2024     Views:665
Budget 2024-25: Major Takeaways and Financial Proj...
01 Aug 2024     Views:850
Budget 2024-25: Major Takeaways and Financial Proj...
01 Aug 2024     Views:760
The Mandal Verdict: Indra Sawhney and Its Lasting ...
22 Jul 2024     Views:939
Supreme Court Emphasizes Direct and a Specific Ple...
22 Jul 2024     Views:787
Bail and Punishment Provisions of NDPS matters...
05 Apr 2023     Views:4193
The Legal Depth of Cryptocurrency....
14 May 2022     Views:5031
Have You Suffered Harm Due to a Cochlear Implant?...
13 May 2022     Views:5253
When is a Deposition Summary used?...
13 May 2022     Views:5326
Denied! 8 Most Common Reasons for Green Card Denia...
25 Feb 2022     Views:5484
International customary law – a study of the Ang...
20 Feb 2022     Views:9861
How to Have an Essay Written for Free?...
10 Feb 2022     Views:4944
How to maximise a law firm’s success with a virt...
28 Dec 2021     Views:5247
Helpful Math Website for Students - AssignMaths.co...
26 Nov 2021     Views:5656
The Upcoming Municipal Nominee Program of Canada...
29 Oct 2021     Views:5490
Assault with a Weapon: How To Get Your Charges Dro...
28 Oct 2021     Views:2804
Law School Personal Statement Tips for Winning Adm...
12 Oct 2021     Views:2444
Can an Employee on Maternity Leave be Terminated?...
05 Oct 2021     Views:2003
OLD STATUTES MAKING A COMEBACK AMID VIRUS OUTBREAK...
04 May 2020     Views:4902
ARTICLE 141: DOCTRINE OF PRECEDENT...
04 May 2020     Views:21270
Presumptions in Evidence Law...
04 May 2020     Views:8136
Unique use of Technology during covid-19 pandemic...
30 Apr 2020     Views:4530
45 days interim bail granted to under- trial priso...
29 Apr 2020     Views:4062
DOCTRINE OF RES GESTAE...
27 Apr 2020     Views:8745
Rights of the LGBTQI community- a long road ahead....
26 Apr 2020     Views:3861
Measures to protect women against domestic violenc...
26 Apr 2020     Views:3682
United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)...
25 Apr 2020     Views:4714
United Nations Convention to Combat Desertificatio...
24 Apr 2020     Views:3492
Increase in Cyberbullying during COVID-19...
24 Apr 2020     Views:1823
DOCTRINE OF COLOURABLE LEGISLATIONS...
24 Apr 2020     Views:2599
Doctrine of lifting of corporate veil...
23 Apr 2020     Views:2156
Meaning of Legal Pluralism...
23 Apr 2020     Views:1818
Once a mortgage, always a mortgage...
23 Apr 2020     Views:55897
Euthanasia- Meaning and Legality in India...
23 Apr 2020     Views:1733
Judicial activism and Judicial restraint...
22 Apr 2020     Views:1876
Concept of Insider Trading under Investment Law...
22 Apr 2020     Views:2072
Need for Legal Awareness...
22 Apr 2020     Views:2023
Is Extradition a Legal Duty of State? ...
22 Apr 2020     Views:6238
The Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Traff...
22 Apr 2020     Views:1513
Why Dependence On Criminal Law Is Not The Solution...
22 Apr 2020     Views:1539
Uniform Civil code...
22 Apr 2020     Views:1621
VETO POWER AND DOUBLE VETO POWER ...
20 Apr 2020     Views:30478
ABETMENT UNDER THE INDIAN PENAL CODE...
20 Apr 2020     Views:6295
Water (Prevention & Control of Pollution) Act, 197...
20 Apr 2020     Views:3132
NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL - CRITICAL ANALYSIS...
20 Apr 2020     Views:5875
LAWS AGAINST ACID ATTACK IN INDIA...
20 Apr 2020     Views:10693
Concept of conciliation...
19 Apr 2020     Views:3314
White collar crimes in India...
19 Apr 2020     Views:2690
No Law To Make Whatsapp Group Admins Liable For Me...
19 Apr 2020     Views:7665
Relationship between International Law and Municip...
18 Apr 2020     Views:54673
International Labour Organization (ILO)...
18 Apr 2020     Views:1808
How is the Law arena affected by COVID-19?...
18 Apr 2020     Views:1422
Motor Vehicle Insurance Law...
18 Apr 2020     Views:1702
CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY (CSR) AND ITS IMPO...
18 Apr 2020     Views:1800
ENVIRONMENTAL GAINS OF THE LOCKDOWN MUST BE PRESER...
18 Apr 2020     Views:1645
Difference between Kidnapping and Abduction...
17 Apr 2020     Views:3373
JUSTIFYING SC ORDER THAT MANDATES FREE COVID-19 TE...
17 Apr 2020     Views:1410
Evolution of the Nature and Scope of Article 12 of...
16 Apr 2020     Views:6256
Corruption laws in India ...
16 Apr 2020     Views:1791
ADVERTISING LAWS IN INDIA...
16 Apr 2020     Views:2066
The Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons...
15 Apr 2020     Views:1766
Business Laws in India...
15 Apr 2020     Views:3362
The Process of Passing an Ordinary Bill in the Par...
14 Apr 2020     Views:12345
International Committee of the Red Cross...
14 Apr 2020     Views:1675
National Company Law Tribunal...
14 Apr 2020     Views:1765
FOOD ADULTERATION...
13 Apr 2020     Views:3216
The United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juv...
13 Apr 2020     Views:4481
Environmental Protection Act, 1986...
12 Apr 2020     Views:2347
IMPORTANCE OF PRECEDENTS ...
12 Apr 2020     Views:10621
MoHFW and ICMR hold a conflicting statement over C...
11 Apr 2020     Views:1487
Introduction to Income Tax Act, 1961...
11 Apr 2020     Views:6273
DEMOCRACY IN INDIA...
10 Apr 2020     Views:2280
United Nations Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS)...
10 Apr 2020     Views:2295
An Overview of Juvenile Delinquency and the Juveni...
09 Apr 2020     Views:2622
How is Absolute Liability different from Strict Li...
09 Apr 2020     Views:25984
International Armed Conflict (IAC) and Non-Interna...
09 Apr 2020     Views:4712
The Concept of Bonded Labour under the Legal Syste...
09 Apr 2020     Views:1679
Why Indian Constitution is called Quasi-federal?...
08 Apr 2020     Views:33243
What should be given primary importance, Human Rig...
08 Apr 2020     Views:1683
Karl Marx: Debates on the Law on Thefts of Wood ...
08 Apr 2020     Views:6374
Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Disc...
07 Apr 2020     Views:1712
Legal Rights of Students in India...
07 Apr 2020     Views:3738
International Covenant on Civil and Political...
06 Apr 2020     Views:1608
Plant Quarantine (Regulation of Import into India)...
06 Apr 2020     Views:2819
The Hart-Fuller debate in a Nutshell ...
06 Apr 2020     Views:19293
Convention on Prevention and Punishment of the Cri...
06 Apr 2020     Views:1561
The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Child...
06 Apr 2020     Views:1553
FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT TO PRIVACY DURING THE HEALTH CRI...
06 Apr 2020     Views:1464
Traditional Knowledge : The Convention on Biologic...
06 Apr 2020     Views:1826
Bailment...
05 Apr 2020     Views:2189
Monopolistic nature of Copyright Societies in Indi...
05 Apr 2020     Views:1871
Marital Rape...
05 Apr 2020     Views:1403
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Bill ...
05 Apr 2020     Views:1364
Manual Scavenging ...
05 Apr 2020     Views:1308
How serious can Online Abuse be?...
05 Apr 2020     Views:1378
Cognizable and non cognizable offences...
05 Apr 2020     Views:6938
Legal Aid In India ...
05 Apr 2020     Views:1722
Basic Structure Doctrine...
05 Apr 2020     Views:1569
Medical Negligence...
05 Apr 2020     Views:1309
Consumer Protection Act, 2019...
05 Apr 2020     Views:1590
Legality of Cryptocurrency in India...
05 Apr 2020     Views:1813
Intimate Partner Violence...
05 Apr 2020     Views:1448
CENTRE USES THE PRETENCE OF ‘FAKE NEWS’ TO SUP...
05 Apr 2020     Views:1315
International Humanitarian Law...
05 Apr 2020     Views:1370
What rights do a disabled person in India have? ...
05 Apr 2020     Views:1736
Universal Declaration of Human Rights...
03 Apr 2020     Views:1649
What is the National Security Act being slapped on...
03 Apr 2020     Views:1361
False News- another epidemic?...
02 Apr 2020     Views:1508
Commercial laws in India a Bird's-eye view...
02 Apr 2020     Views:8896
All About Suo Moto Proceedings...
02 Apr 2020     Views:1781
Intellectual Property Rights...
02 Apr 2020     Views:1491
Alternate Dispute Resolution...
02 Apr 2020     Views:1471
Types of E-commerce Models ...
02 Apr 2020     Views:1463
'Intermeddler' as a Legal Representative under the...
01 Apr 2020     Views:9781
Right to health- A fundamental right...
31 Mar 2020     Views:1522
What is a Green Bond? ...
31 Mar 2020     Views:1419
Defamation...
31 Mar 2020     Views:1388
CONSTITUTIONALITY OF NATIONAL LOCKDOWN...
30 Mar 2020     Views:1586
Positive and Negative Impacts of the US-China Trad...
29 Mar 2020     Views:3171
Public Heath(Covid-19) Rules, 2020...
29 Mar 2020     Views:1315
Opinion | Migration and the Mockery of Lockdown- I...
29 Mar 2020     Views:1347
Female Genital Mutilation- Violation of Human Righ...
29 Mar 2020     Views:1699
Supreme Court’s judgement on Shreya Singhal v. U...
29 Mar 2020     Views:2382
International Court of Justice...
28 Mar 2020     Views:1760
Feminist Jurisprudence...
27 Mar 2020     Views:1900
IP Protection and Diffusion of Environmentally Sou...
27 Mar 2020     Views:2036
Covid-19 fostered Racism ...
26 Mar 2020     Views:1469
Mercy Petition: The Process ...
26 Mar 2020     Views:2679
WTO Work Programme on E-Commerce ...
26 Mar 2020     Views:1567
Comparison between Section 144 of CrPC, lockdown a...
26 Mar 2020     Views:2096
Prison reforms...
26 Mar 2020     Views:1415
How far has the LGBTQI community come?...
26 Mar 2020     Views:1648
Public Interest Litigation...
26 Mar 2020     Views:1658
The Right to information Act- Still a right or not...
25 Mar 2020     Views:1661
Legalization of Marijuana...
25 Mar 2020     Views:1513
Significance of AB PM-JAY in the light of COVID-19...
25 Mar 2020     Views:1390
The History of Magna Carta...
25 Mar 2020     Views:2637
Introduction to Child Rights in India...
25 Mar 2020     Views:6088
CENTRE CANNOT DECLARE AN ORGANISATION POLITICAL: ...
06 Mar 2020     Views:3902
A DECISION MADE BY SC ON AYODHYA VERDICT...
29 Jan 2020     Views:1868
RIGHTS OF TRANSGENDER IN INDIA...
29 Jan 2020     Views:2089
MARITAL RAPE - A NON CRIMINALIZED CRIME IN INDIA...
24 Jan 2020     Views:2119
MISCONCEPTION ABOUT CITIZENSHIP AMENDMENT ACT ...
22 Jan 2020     Views:2038
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE...
21 Jan 2020     Views:2113
Hyderabad Encounter- Human Rights Violation or Jus...
18 Jan 2020     Views:2627
NOTE ON NIRBHAY CASE CONVICTS...
17 Jan 2020     Views:2036
NOTE ON ARTICLE 370...
17 Jan 2020     Views:1990
Rape and Indian laws ...
13 Jan 2020     Views:2615
An overview on Drugs Law...
13 Jan 2020     Views:2193
Mob Lynching: Role of Politics and approach of Jud...
08 Jan 2020     Views:5036
Trademarks: Spectrum of Distinctiveness and Indian...
06 Jan 2020     Views:5800
Women Prisoners ...
23 Dec 2019     Views:2207
Child Care Institutions and its Judicial Interpret...
23 Dec 2019     Views:2308
Smart Contracts and Their Relevance in The Legal P...
19 Dec 2019     Views:1941
Government Vs Opposition on the Citizenship Amendm...
12 Dec 2019     Views:2261
Condition Of Lady Advocates Vulnerable: Lawyer App...
11 Dec 2019     Views:2775
Montesquieu’s Theory of Separation of Powers: Ho...
10 Dec 2019     Views:35302
JUDICIAL REVIEW AND JUDICIAL OVER-REACH: TRANSITIO...
10 Dec 2019     Views:4077
Due Process Of Law For Rapists Must Speed Up Now...
10 Dec 2019     Views:1883
Human Rights Of Women Must Also Be Respected...
09 Dec 2019     Views:1904
Speedy Capital Punishment For Rapists Must Be Ensu...
08 Dec 2019     Views:1955
Why Only One Dhananjoy Chatterjee Hanged Till Now?...
07 Dec 2019     Views:2534
Why No Death Penalty For Gang Rape In India?...
07 Dec 2019     Views:1645
Rape Convicts Must Be Hanged At The Earliest From ...
05 Dec 2019     Views:1671
No Mercy Petition And No Life Term Ever For Gang R...
02 Dec 2019     Views:1969
Section 207 CrPC: Magistrate Cannot Withhold Any D...
02 Dec 2019     Views:3352
UP Bar Council Chairman Harishankar Singh Openly C...
17 Nov 2019     Views:2221
AN UNDERSTANDING OF PRESIDENT’S RULE UNDER ART 3...
13 Nov 2019     Views:3982
COOKING UP A LEGALLY PROTECTED MEAL: A study on IP...
13 Nov 2019     Views:2040
Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde To Be The New CJI From...
31 Oct 2019     Views:2297
UK Supreme Court Declares Prorogation Of Parliamen...
29 Sep 2019     Views:1735
Right To Access Internet Is Part Of Right To Priva...
23 Sep 2019     Views:1759
No Attempt Made To Frame Uniform Civil Code Despit...
19 Sep 2019     Views:1687
A Legal Giant Named Ram Jethmalani Finally Passes ...
09 Sep 2019     Views:1567
Judicial Service – HC Can’t Modify/Relax Instr...
02 Sep 2019     Views:1357
Government Notifies Strict Provisions Of Motor Veh...
31 Aug 2019     Views:1472
NDPS: Reverse Burden Of Proof Does Not Absolve Pro...
30 Aug 2019     Views:2333
Institutional Independence, Financial Autonomy Int...
28 Aug 2019     Views:1394
A Legal Luminary And A Political Stalwart Passes A...
25 Aug 2019     Views:1632
Allahabad HC Bans DJs And Passes Directions For Re...
24 Aug 2019     Views:1373
Delhi HC Refuses Anticipatory Bail To P Chidambara...
23 Aug 2019     Views:1583
Chidambaram Getting No Respite From Courts...
23 Aug 2019     Views:1311
Domestic Violence And Dowry Accused Set Free By Th...
22 Aug 2019     Views:4669
Bombsy HC: Treat every citizen with dignity...
20 Aug 2019     Views:4861
Integration Of J&K With India Is Now Full And Fina...
20 Aug 2019     Views:2390
Second Appeal Not To Be Dismissed Merely On The Gr...
18 Aug 2019     Views:1484
Judge Can Recuse From A Case At His Own Volition, ...
17 Aug 2019     Views:1577
Don't politicize demolition of temples: SC...
16 Aug 2019     Views:4923
Madras Christian College - female students sexuall...
16 Aug 2019     Views:4537
Charged for employing triple talaq...
16 Aug 2019     Views:2305
Earlier Convicted now Acquitted - Lack of Conclusi...
15 Aug 2019     Views:2244
MACAD Scheme to be enforced in Tamil Nadu - 1st Oc...
15 Aug 2019     Views:2171
Filing Of Criminal Complaint For Settling Civil Di...
15 Aug 2019     Views:1615
End Discrimination: Equalize legal age of Marriage...
14 Aug 2019     Views:1461
Madras HC issues directions upon Officers to check...
14 Aug 2019     Views:1988
BOMBAY HC to Civic Bodies: "Own up to your respons...
14 Aug 2019     Views:1498
Infringement of Registered TM "Vistara" - Threat t...
13 Aug 2019     Views:2045
US Citizen approaches Bombay High Court After Bein...
13 Aug 2019     Views:1679
Normalcy need not be restored in J&K instantly : S...
13 Aug 2019     Views:1587
Prohibitory Steps taken against Students for Consu...
13 Aug 2019     Views:1584
Basic Amenities to Traffic Personnel ...
12 Aug 2019     Views:1428
Madras HC upholds the appointment notification of ...
12 Aug 2019     Views:1513
Plea against E-pharmacies struck down by Bombay HC...
12 Aug 2019     Views:1520
Parliament Rightly Makes Triple Talaq Criminal But...
12 Aug 2019     Views:1497
No Tax Deduction from Motor Accident Compensation ...
11 Aug 2019     Views:1604
Delhi HC: Plant 50 Trees, Quash Criminal Proceedin...
11 Aug 2019     Views:1449
Iyal Isai Nataka Mandram should abide by the time ...
11 Aug 2019     Views:1695
Transitory Committee to be formed for Indian Arche...
11 Aug 2019     Views:1482
Outlawing Of Triple Talaq Is Highly Commendable...
11 Aug 2019     Views:1464
Daring Resolve Taken By Centre On Jammu And Kashmi...
10 Aug 2019     Views:1399
M Kavitha’s suspension to be reviewed...
09 Aug 2019     Views:2124
SC: Adverse Possession owing to Title over Propert...
09 Aug 2019     Views:1551
Regulation of Online streaming contents out of the...
09 Aug 2019     Views:1480
Constitution Cannot Be Above Country Come What May...
09 Aug 2019     Views:1498
Ocean waves to be our new energy source...
08 Aug 2019     Views:1897
Delhi HC: Simple language to be incorporated in FI...
08 Aug 2019     Views:1811
THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA ASKED THE GOVERNMENT T...
08 Aug 2019     Views:1356
Victim Has A Right To Assist The Court In A Trial ...
08 Aug 2019     Views:2952
Study of Lakes to be Conducted by NEERI...
07 Aug 2019     Views:1757
SC Denies Permission to Conduct DNA Tests...
07 Aug 2019     Views:1657
Whatsapp's fight against interference with User-Pr...
07 Aug 2019     Views:1484
Evidence Of A Solitary Witness In A Criminal Trial...
07 Aug 2019     Views:1526
High Court of Karnataka set aside the retirement o...
07 Aug 2019     Views:1710
Study of Lakes to be Conducted by NEERI...
06 Aug 2019     Views:1630
History-sheeter kidnaps and rapes a College Studen...
06 Aug 2019     Views:1686
No Room For Sympathy While Sentencing Terror Convi...
06 Aug 2019     Views:1646
Rejected Plea: Declaration of Vande Mataram as Nat...
05 Aug 2019     Views:1889
Madras HC corrects the computation error of Motor ...
05 Aug 2019     Views:1459
Fundamental Right To Privacy Not Absolute And Must...
05 Aug 2019     Views:1671
Diocese of Tanjore Society School gets relief from...
04 Aug 2019     Views:1665
THE TEMPLES IN KARNATAKA NO MORE BE GOVERNED UNDER...
03 Aug 2019     Views:1738
Triple Talaq legislation is challenged in the Delh...
03 Aug 2019     Views:1458
Special Olympics International Football Championsh...
03 Aug 2019     Views:1374
Concession to be given to disabled persons appeari...
03 Aug 2019     Views:2026
Bombay High Court Hears Dowry Case Involving A Civ...
03 Aug 2019     Views:1766
Karnataka High Court on the condition of Roads...
02 Aug 2019     Views:2018
SC ORDERS DEATH PENALTY IN COIMBATORE GANG-RAPE CA...
02 Aug 2019     Views:1565
RBI Changes Features Of New Currency Notes. Bombay...
02 Aug 2019     Views:1417
Interest Of Victim And Society At Large Must Also ...
02 Aug 2019     Views:1450
Abolition of Colonial Decorum in Courts...
01 Aug 2019     Views:5713
Punjab & Haryana HC Bans Use Of Loudspeakers Witho...
31 Jul 2019     Views:2248
ICJ Has Rightly Called Pakistan’s Bluff In Jadha...
26 Jul 2019     Views:1475
Review And Reconsider Conviction And Sentencing Of...
22 Jul 2019     Views:1511
Plaintiff Cannot Be Forced To Add Parties Against ...
21 Jul 2019     Views:1700
Biggest Slap By ICJ Directly Right On The Face Of ...
19 Jul 2019     Views:1432
Delhi HC Imposes Rs. 50,000 Cost On Woman For Fals...
17 Jul 2019     Views:1459
Non-Appointment Of Judges Affects Speedy Justice: ...
16 Jul 2019     Views:1386
Right To Get Anticipatory Bail Is Not Any Fundamen...
14 Jul 2019     Views:1745
Plea For Anticipatory Bail Not Maintainable Before...
13 Jul 2019     Views:1896
Divorce Cannot Be Granted Only On Ground Of Irretr...
11 Jul 2019     Views:1414
Right To Shelter A Fundamental Right; State Has Co...
08 Jul 2019     Views:1503
HC Cannot Reverse Acquittal Without Affording Oppo...
06 Jul 2019     Views:1280
Centre Is Legally Empowered To Create A High Court...
05 Jul 2019     Views:1980
Centre Must Now Immediately Order Creation Of HC B...
03 Jul 2019     Views:1351
UAPA: SC Dismisses PFI Leader’s Plea Seeking Dis...
02 Jul 2019     Views:1542
How To Record The Evidence Of Deaf And Dumb Rape V...
01 Jul 2019     Views:2380
Ban Advocates From Carrying Weapons Inside Court P...
26 Jun 2019     Views:2678
Enact Strict Law To Ensure Personal Safety Of Doct...
26 Jun 2019     Views:2676
Mere Aggressive Behaviour Of Wife Not A Ground Of ...
26 Jun 2019     Views:2806
Court Cannot Destroy Faith & Beliefs Of People: Ma...
07 Jun 2019     Views:1317
Insult Of Soldier In Name Of Law Is Most Disgracef...
07 Jun 2019     Views:1633
Courts Cannot Decide Eligibility And Essential Qua...
20 May 2019     Views:4798
SC Upholds Constitutionality Of Section 23 Of PCPN...
20 May 2019     Views:2676
My Unflinching Faith In CJI Stands Fully Vindicate...
20 May 2019     Views:1839
Solitary Confinement Of Death Convict Prior To Rej...
20 May 2019     Views:2171
Section 498A & 306 IPC: Incidents Which Happened M...
20 May 2019     Views:5674
Why Should UP Have Least High Court Benches In Ind...
20 May 2019     Views:1613
Successive Bail Applications Should Be Placed Befo...
20 May 2019     Views:8872
“Drop This Episode From Your Minds And Gossips...
20 May 2019     Views:1484
Is The Criticism Of In-House Procedure Justified?...
20 May 2019     Views:1696
Mere Pendency Of Civil Case Between Complainant An...
20 May 2019     Views:1412
Section 482 CrPC: HC Should Assign Reasons As To W...
20 May 2019     Views:3159
Delhi High Court Directs Government To Set Up 18 F...
20 May 2019     Views:1504
No New Appointments To Be Made From In-Service Can...
18 May 2019     Views:1354
Only Advocates Can Plead And Argue On Behalf Of Li...
09 Apr 2019     Views:3469
Nations Must Make Gun Laws More Stricter...
04 Apr 2019     Views:4268
SC Designates 37 Lawyers As Senior Advocates...
04 Apr 2019     Views:6744
Adding Additional Accused: To Invoke Section 319 C...
04 Apr 2019     Views:6480
SC Sets Aside Life Ban Imposed On Cricketer Sreesa...
04 Apr 2019     Views:1760
P&H HC Directs Protection Of Honest Officers While...
04 Apr 2019     Views:1548
Death Sentence Can Be Imposed Only When Life Impri...
19 Mar 2019     Views:2101
Islamabad High Court Rejects Plea Against Release ...
19 Mar 2019     Views:2263
Lawyers Resort To Seek Unnecessary Adjournments Am...
19 Mar 2019     Views:2342
Even Poem Can Help Save A Death Convict From Gallo...
19 Mar 2019     Views:2383
Educated Woman Supposed To Be Fully Aware Of Conse...
19 Mar 2019     Views:1400
Jammu and Kashmir HC Upholds PM’s Employment Pac...
19 Mar 2019     Views:1842
Magistrate Shall Specify Whether Sentences Awarded...
23 Feb 2019     Views:2548
Mere Inability To Repay Loan Does Not Constitute C...
23 Feb 2019     Views:3063
Inability To Establish Motive In A Case Of Circums...
23 Feb 2019     Views:2809
Punjab & Haryana HC Issues Slew Of Directions To C...
23 Feb 2019     Views:3101
Court Has to Confine Itself To The Four Corners Of...
23 Feb 2019     Views:1543
Long Pendency Amounts To A Special Reason For Impo...
23 Feb 2019     Views:1611
Successive Applications For Recalling Witnesses Sh...
23 Feb 2019     Views:3153
Lieutenant General (Rtd) Cannot Be Tried In A Gene...
06 Feb 2019     Views:2467
Autonomy Of the Bar Cannot Be Taken Over By The Co...
05 Feb 2019     Views:3164
Casual Act Of Possession Over Property Does Not Co...
04 Feb 2019     Views:2410
No Authority Can Claim Privilege Not To Comply Wit...
04 Feb 2019     Views:2646
Death Sentence Only When The Alternative Option Is...
04 Feb 2019     Views:2729
SC Imposes Rs 5 Crore Penalty On A Medical College...
28 Jan 2019     Views:2011
A Judicial Officer Is Not An Ordinary Government S...
25 Jan 2019     Views:2136
Rape And Murder Of 8 Year Old Girl: SC Commutes De...
23 Jan 2019     Views:2174
Mere Allegations Of Harassment Without Proximate P...
23 Jan 2019     Views:2802
Legal Article Why Should They Speak Lies: Decease...
23 Jan 2019     Views:1688
Can a Economic offender can escape by surrendering...
22 Jan 2019     Views:1564
NCW is a Lame Duck or Legal Guardian for women...
22 Jan 2019     Views:1467
Mutual Consent Divorce Procedure in Chennai Family...
21 Jan 2019     Views:6598
Quick Divorce in India...
21 Jan 2019     Views:1600
4 Important things to file Divorce in Chennai...
21 Jan 2019     Views:1767
How to get Divorce for Muslim Men ...
21 Jan 2019     Views:11999
Offences Under Section 307 IPC Can’t Be Quashed ...
17 Jan 2019     Views:3700
Suspicion, Howsoever Grave, Can’t Substitute Pro...
17 Jan 2019     Views:1549
Delhi HC Rejects AJL's Plea Against Centre's Order...
03 Jan 2019     Views:2527
1984 Anti-Sikh Riots: Delhi HC Awards Life Term To...
03 Jan 2019     Views:2233
SC Dismisses Petitions Seeking Probe Into Rafale D...
20 Dec 2018     Views:2638
Executive Magistrate Cannot Direct Police To Regis...
20 Dec 2018     Views:3196
Why Lawyers Of West UP Are Compelled To Strike Fre...
20 Dec 2018     Views:1797
recheck...
19 Dec 2018     Views:2353
1984 Anti-Sikh Riots – Delhi HC Upholds Convicti...
12 Dec 2018     Views:1959
Why Lawless West UP Has No High Court Bench?...
11 Dec 2018     Views:2257
Bombay HC Quashes Government Resolution Making It ...
26 Nov 2018     Views:2375
SLP Against Death Sentence Shall Not Be Dismissed ...
26 Nov 2018     Views:2434
SC Allows Live-Streaming Of Public Proceedings In ...
26 Nov 2018     Views:2291
Sexual Offenders Registry For Law Enforcement Agen...
26 Nov 2018     Views:3978
Delhi HC Sentences 16 Policemen To Life Imprisonme...
26 Nov 2018     Views:1563
Men Too Have Right Not To Be Defamed And Denounced...
26 Nov 2018     Views:1679
Courts Have To Adequately Consider Defence Of The ...
26 Nov 2018     Views:1535
CJI Ranjan Gogoi Demonstrates His Firm Resolve And...
26 Nov 2018     Views:1466
SC Issues Directions On Examination Of Witnesses I...
26 Nov 2018     Views:3042
Aadhaar Held Mandatory For Government Subsidies An...
26 Nov 2018     Views:1908
Legal Article Now Bar Council ID Card Is Valid Id...
01 Nov 2018     Views:2656
SC Sets Deadline On Sale Of BS-IV Vehicles; Says H...
01 Nov 2018     Views:2486
Devotion Cannot Be Subjected To Gender Discriminat...
23 Oct 2018     Views:3780
There Cannot Be Any Mechanical Denial Of Appointme...
23 Oct 2018     Views:2822
Rights Of Accused Far Outweigh That Of Victims, Ne...
23 Oct 2018     Views:1703
SC Strikes Down 158 Year Old Adultery Law Under Se...
23 Oct 2018     Views:2727
Extra-Judicial Confession Of Accused Need Not In A...
23 Oct 2018     Views:1939
Leaders Of Outfits Calling For Mob Violence Liable...
23 Oct 2018     Views:1712
Section 377 IPC Decriminalised Partially By Supre...
23 Oct 2018     Views:2212
New CJI Ranjan Gogoi Is Determined To Ensure Sweep...
23 Oct 2018     Views:2095
Court Must Not Go Deep Into The Matter While Consi...
26 Sep 2018     Views:2402
Reputation Of An Individual Is An Insegregable Fac...
26 Sep 2018     Views:3183
Sec. 498A IPC: Only HC Can Quash Cases On Settleme...
18 Sep 2018     Views:4100
Punjab & Haryana HC Orders Rape Convict, Mother To...
17 Sep 2018     Views:2471
Bombay HC Imposes Cost Of Rs 50K On Petitioner Fir...
17 Sep 2018     Views:1743
Uttarakhand HC Dismisses “Contempt Petition” A...
14 Sep 2018     Views:1811
SC Stresses On Need To Develop And Recognize ‘De...
08 Sep 2018     Views:1753
Mirchpur Dalit Killings: “Atrocities Against SCs...
08 Sep 2018     Views:1895
SC Upholds Pan India Reservation Rule in Delhi; Bu...
03 Sep 2018     Views:2203
NDPS Bail Conditions Discriminatory, Irrational An...
31 Aug 2018     Views:3062
People Without A Degree Performing Surgeries: Utta...
28 Aug 2018     Views:1818
Uttarakhand HC Issues Directions For Conserving ...
28 Aug 2018     Views:2307
12 Year Old Girl’s Rape And Murder: Constitute P...
28 Aug 2018     Views:2056
MP HC To Debar Members/Office Bearers Of Bar Counc...
22 Aug 2018     Views:1768
Special Squad, Police Patrolling Every 24 Hours To...
20 Aug 2018     Views:1897
NRC Being Prepared Under Supreme Court’s Watch I...
20 Aug 2018     Views:1913
Victims Of Crime Can Seek Cancellation Of Bail: MP...
20 Aug 2018     Views:2069
Delhi HC Strikes Down Provisions In Law That Crimi...
13 Aug 2018     Views:2121
Delhi HC Quashes Govt Notification Revising Minimu...
09 Aug 2018     Views:2074
Poorest Of Poor Cannot Go To Private Hospitals: Ut...
07 Aug 2018     Views:2396
How Long Will Lawyers Of West UP Just Keep Strikin...
04 Aug 2018     Views:2347
Courts Must See That The Public Doesn’t Lose Con...
04 Aug 2018     Views:1863
UK Tier 1 Entrepreneur Visa: Overview from Experts...
31 Jul 2018     Views:1949
Enact Law For Safety Of Soldiers Of Jammu And Kash...
23 Jul 2018     Views:1820
SC Advocates Creating A Special Law Against Lynchi...
23 Jul 2018     Views:3189
Matrimonial Discord Can’t Be Considered As Reaso...
23 Jul 2018     Views:3188
Uttarakhand HC Recommends Govt To Enact Legislatio...
23 Jul 2018     Views:3024
High Court Priests Cannot Refuse To Perform Religi...
23 Jul 2018     Views:2301
Uttarakhand High Court Passes String Of Directions...
23 Jul 2018     Views:1643
SC Finally Decides Master Of Roster Case...
23 Jul 2018     Views:1597
Stone Pelters And Terrorists Have No Right To Life...
23 Jul 2018     Views:2131
Remove Designations Like Police, HC, Journalist, A...
23 Jul 2018     Views:2098
Why Centre is Providing Security For Separatists B...
23 Jul 2018     Views:1886
Farmer Suicide Due To Bankruptcy Or Indebtedness: ...
05 Jul 2018     Views:4648
Every Indian Should Salute Brave Soldier Aurangzeb...
05 Jul 2018     Views:3288
Uttarakhand HC Issues Directions To Curb Drug Pedd...
05 Jul 2018     Views:2605
Have A Functional National Law University Within 3...
05 Jul 2018     Views:2214
Establish Regional Bench Of AFT In The State Withi...
05 Jul 2018     Views:1611
Cancel Licences of Drivers Using Cell Phones; Helm...
05 Jul 2018     Views:1495
Uttarakhand High Court Puts Restrictions On Noise ...
05 Jul 2018     Views:1663
Supreme Court To Look Into Validity Of Amended Law...
05 Jul 2018     Views:1487
Mysterious Deaths, Rapes, Malnutrition, Unsanitary...
29 Jun 2018     Views:2654
No Politics Please Over Plan To Assassinate PM Mod...
11 Jun 2018     Views:2057
Free Mentally Ill Children And Formulate Policies ...
11 Jun 2018     Views:2497
Landmark Ruling By Uttarakhand HC On Solitary Conf...
07 Jun 2018     Views:3086
Right Of Adult Couple To Live Together Without Mar...
06 Jun 2018     Views:2186
Why BJP Will Be Wiped Out In West UP And UP?...
06 Jun 2018     Views:2268
Why UP Has Just One High Court Bench And West UP N...
05 Jun 2018     Views:1798
Women Governed By Muslim Personal Law Can Invoke P...
04 Jun 2018     Views:1545
Why Is BJP Not Creating More Benches In UP?...
01 Jun 2018     Views:1703
Probation Period To Count For New Civil Servants B...
01 Jun 2018     Views:3470
SC Women Lawyers Association Seeks Chemical Castra...
01 Jun 2018     Views:1527
SC Finally Steps In To Expedite POCSO Cases...
01 Jun 2018     Views:2951
UP Former CMs Can’t Stay In Govt Bungalows: SC...
01 Jun 2018     Views:1478
Make BCCI A Public Body: Law Panel...
01 Jun 2018     Views:1800
Self-Styled Godman Asaram Awarded Life Until Death...
01 Jun 2018     Views:1715
Why Cases Withdrawn Against Stone Pelters In Kashm...
01 Jun 2018     Views:1879
A High Court Bench For West UP In Meerut Is Impera...
01 Jun 2018     Views:2065
People Of Karnataka Should Worship Congress...
01 Jun 2018     Views:1897
Delhi HC Upholds Life Term To Seven Policemen...
19 Mar 2018     Views:1611
Finance Act-2018 And Customs Act-1962 (Amendments)...
28 Feb 2018     Views:1735
Why No Death Or Life Term For Corruption?...
19 Feb 2018     Views:1535
Will Electoral Bonds Usher In Transparency?...
19 Feb 2018     Views:1495
How Long Will Lawyers Of West UP Keep Striking?...
19 Feb 2018     Views:1602
Finance Act 2018 and Customs Act 1962...
18 Feb 2018     Views:2070
Why Has Stone Pelting Been Legalised In Kashmir?...
12 Feb 2018     Views:1649
Shopian Firing: Major's Dad Moving SC For Quashing...
12 Feb 2018     Views:1556
Soldiers Have Every Legal Right To Kill Stone Pelt...
12 Feb 2018     Views:2939
Attack On Lawyers: Delhi HC Issues Notice To Delhi...
10 Feb 2018     Views:1529
Female Foeticide Must Be Punished Most Strictly...
10 Feb 2018     Views:1797
Soldiers Have Every Legal Right To Act In Self Def...
10 Feb 2018     Views:1537
New Consumer Protection Bill 2018 Will Entail More...
10 Feb 2018     Views:1569
CJI Brings Out A Roster To Allot Cases...
10 Feb 2018     Views:2104
Five Year Jail Term For Lalu In Third Fodder Scam ...
10 Feb 2018     Views:1632
SC Quashes All The 88 Mining Leases In Goa...
10 Feb 2018     Views:1675
Prevention Of Money Laundering Act -2002 (PMLA-20...
07 Feb 2018     Views:1681
Prevention Of Money Laundering Act-2002 Amended ...
04 Feb 2018     Views:2182
Prevention Of Money Laundering Act -2002 --U/S 45(...
03 Feb 2018     Views:2026
Prevention Of Money Laundering Act-2002 (P...
16 Jan 2018     Views:1734
humanity...
13 Jan 2018     Views:1499
Prevention Of Money Laundering Act-2002 PMLA...
13 Jan 2018     Views:1526
Right to Know...
05 Jan 2018     Views:1989
A STUDY OF CERTAIN DEDUCTIONS ON INCOME TAX RELATI...
29 Dec 2017     Views:2178
Enviornment protection is for saving universe...
28 Dec 2017     Views:1498
RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND STATUS OF SECTION 377, IPC, 1...
26 Dec 2017     Views:1766
PROBLEMS WITHIN THE EXISTING POLICE SYSTEM...
26 Dec 2017     Views:1589
LEGALITY : LEGALITY OF MARITAL RAPE...
26 Dec 2017     Views:2516
RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND DIRECTION FOR MANDATORY AADHA...
26 Dec 2017     Views:1706
THE PARADOX OF PLEA BARGAINING...
26 Dec 2017     Views:2483
JOURNEY OF EVMs AMIDST CONTROVERSIES ...
26 Dec 2017     Views:1612
UIDAI suspends Airtel, Airtel Payments and Banks e...
26 Dec 2017     Views:2104
2G Scam : The 2G Scam and much more...
26 Dec 2017     Views:2338
Kerala teen surveillance case: Invasion of Privacy...
26 Dec 2017     Views:1772
Motherhood or Employment- the judicial perspective...
26 Dec 2017     Views:1796

Most Read Articles

  • Once a mortgage, always a mortgage
    On 23 Apr 2020    Views:55897
  • Relationship between International Law and Municipal Law
    On 18 Apr 2020    Views:54673
  • Montesquieu’s Theory of Separation of Powers: How it has been adopted in India
    On 10 Dec 2019    Views:35302
  • Why Indian Constitution is called Quasi-federal?
    On 08 Apr 2020    Views:33243
  • VETO POWER AND DOUBLE VETO POWER
    On 20 Apr 2020    Views:30478
View all >>

Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified Propertified

86540

Lawyers Network

103860

Users

630

Cities Serving

114

Law Schools Network

59824

Law Students Network

About us

  • Company Profile

Indian Major Laws

  • Indian Constitution
  • IPC
  • CrPC
  • CPC
  • Companies Act
  • Indian Evidence Act
  • CGST Act
  • Limitation Act

Policies

  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Refund & Cancellation

    Ads & Media

  • Resource Sharing
  • Advertiser(Sign Up/Login)
  • Media

    Careers

  • Internships
  • Jobs
  • Student Journalists

    HELP & SUPPORT

  • Contact Us
  • Grievances
  • Test

News

  • Legal News
  • Post Article
  • Post Interview

Legal Library

  • Central Acts
  • Deeds Drafts [1128 ]
  • Legal Maxims

Connect

Lawsisto Direct

 

  •  
  •  
DISCLAIMER
Copyright © Lawsisto Private Limited. All rights reserved.
Unless otherwise indicated, all materials on these pages are copyrighted by Lawsisto Private Limited. All rights reserved. No part of these pages, either text or image may
be used for any purpose. By continuing past this page, you agree to our Terms of Service, Cookie Policy, Privacy Policy and Content Policies.