#Supreme Court India

[votermood]

In India's democratic framework, both the Election Commission of India (ECI) and the Supreme Court of India play significant roles. While the ECI focuses on the administration of elections, the Supreme Court exercises broader judicial authority. Understanding the comparative power of these two institutions is essential for comprehending their impact on political issues.

[once-in-a-blue-moon2021]

Pleading for the DHFL Victims’ assertion of agency- marginalization due to financial abuse: A Letter to Hon'ble CJI Chandrachud

Pleading for the DHFL Victims’ assertion of agency- marginalization due to financial abuse: A Letter to Hon’ble CJI Chandrachud

To Justice Dhananjaya Yeshwant Chandrachud, The Honourable Chief Justice of India Sub: Pleading for the DHFL Victims’ assertion of agency: marginalization due to financial abuse Dear Sir,  First of all, on the auspicious occasion of your birthday, let every moment of your life be a new birth (mahasthavira jataka). In the midst of catastrophic anthropogenic glocal heating⤡ and a devastated…

[gold-dust-angel]

Good to see this trending even though I have no idea why suddenly today but—

A historic debate on marriage equality and legalising same-sex marriage is underway in the Supreme Court of India. The Union govt. is against it of course but the SC judges and the lawyers representing the petitioners are very progressive. The recordings of the live hearings are up on youtube and worth watching because the arguments in favor are just ✨chef's kiss✨ The verdict is yet to be out but I'm really hopeful. Anxious but hopeful. So far the CJI's statements point to a positive outcome for the queer community but let's wait and watch. It's gonna be epic🌈

[firebrand-witch]

straight men: i hate my wife! and I hate this ball and chain life

straight men: it is a DUTY to be married before you're 30. it's not an option

straight men: marriage is a sacred institution. (yes, my wife looks after the household chores, MY children, MY parents, what about it? it's her duty as a wife)

straight men: a marriage is like a workshop, a man works, the wife shops😂

straight men: talking to your wife is like reading the terms and conditions, you don't read anything and click agree😂

the same straight men while making laws: same sex marriage should be illegal because it destroys society and ruins the institution of marriage. (To the gays and lesbians) you're ugly, you disgust me, give me 2000

[its-mint-to-be]

all these bollywood celebs who pretended to be so woke and such big allies to queer people when they had queer films to promote have disappeared when it comes time to actually use their platform

yes im looking at you ayushman khurana, bhumi pednekar, jitendra kumar, rajkumar rao, madhuri dixit. tum toh ally the na community ke? where is your 'love is love' now? when we stand before the SC to ask for marriage rights, where are you now?!

this is exactly why queer people never wanted your disgusting representation in the first place. because we know you wouldn't give a shit about queer people and community irl. y'all just wanted to be 'progressive', use our stories for your profits and then use your privilege to get away with it.

sincerely, fuck off and take your fake representation with you

[buttercuparry]

In a country where, as cliché as it sounds, the woman is either the Madonna or the whore, where the purity of someone who identifies as a woman is sometimes still determined by the presence of a strip of skin between her legs, and blood purity is practiced via casteism- in that country how can same sex marriage be given a green signal? I mean don't we still get murdered if we marry outside our caste? And we have to jump seven to nine circles of hell to marry someone of another faith. How would one determine if a woman is pure if she falls in bed with another woman? How can one maintain their pride of their bloodline ( hence caste ) if a son marries a son? Orphans getting adopted into families with same sex parents- blood purity, caste purity, gender roles, sex taboos will all turn topsy turvy...of course the supreme court couldn't legalize same sex marriages. Why did we even think of it.

[wordsifelt]

Anyone else been watching the marriage equality case as it's been proceeding? (For those who don't know, the supreme court of india has been debating the legalization of same sex and trans marriage rights).

The petitioners made a pretty convincing case (according to me atleast). It's the turn of the other side now. Hopefully soon all Indians will have the right to marry whoever we want irrespective of gender.

[thegirlwholivesin-delusion]

You really gotta love the SC sometimes

Ik this is a small step but in this country , even a small step is good

[sasusakucore]

I hate my country's Supreme Court so much. These judges deserve the deepest pits of hell for saying that in a country which is said to be one of the worst countries for women especially for married women, who face high rate of rape, abuse and death at the hands of their husbands and his family, women are misusing the law(which is a blatant lie). These judges would be the same judges that will justify marital rape. No wonder our country is a hell for women. And also Indian MRAs deserve to rot painfully along these judges for spreading misogynistic lies about laws that protect Indian women.

[tiiramisu-cake]

Take a moment to read 🩵

[oberoilawchambers]

SUPREME COURT UPHOLDS BAN ON FIRECRACKERS FOR A POLLUTION-FREE DIWALI: A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE

The Supreme Court has announced that upholding the ban on the sale and use of firecrackers across the country.

The Supreme Court has announced that upholding the ban on the sale and use of firecrackers across the country has far-reaching implications, not only for public health and environmental protection but also for legal precedent and the interpretation of fundamental rights. The court’s ruling, which was first imposed in 2018, has been challenged by several petitioners, but the court has reaffirmed its position, citing the well-documented health and environmental hazards associated with fireworks. The court emphasized that the right to celebrate Diwali does not supersede the fundamental right to clean air and a healthy environment.

LEGAL STATUS QUO

It must be noted that bursting crackers lead to a violation of Fundamental rights along with the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981; The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986; and The Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000. regulations. The decision has significant legal implications, not only for the regulation of firecrackers but also for the interpretation of fundamental rights and the application of environmental protection laws. The court’s ruling sets a strong precedent for future cases involving conflicts between individual rights and environmental protection.

The decision also highlights the importance of scientific evidence in informing legal decisions. The court’s reliance on scientific studies on the health and environmental impacts of firecrackers demonstrates the importance of evidence-based policymaking.

Moreover, the court’s decision has far-reaching implications for environmental jurisprudence in India. The court’s recognition of the right to a clean environment as a fundamental right and its emphasis on the precautionary principle and polluter pays principle have strengthened the legal framework for environmental protection in the country.

The Supreme Court’s decision is a major victory for public health and environmental protection. Firecrackers are a major source of air pollution, particularly in urban areas. They release harmful pollutants such as particulate matter and sulfur dioxide, which can cause respiratory problems, heart disease, and other health problems.

In addition, firecrackers can cause noise pollution, which can disrupt sleep, increase stress levels, and even cause hearing loss. The Supreme Court’s decision will help to reduce air and noise pollution and improve the overall quality of life for millions of Indians.

CASE LAWS SUPPORTING THE BAN

The Supreme Court’s decision is grounded in a strong foundation of case law that has established the importance of environmental protection and the fundamental right to clean air. Key case laws supporting the ban include:

Arjun Gopal vs. Union of India (2018): In this landmark case, the Supreme Court recognized the right to a clean environment as a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The court also emphasized the precautionary principle, which states that even in the absence of scientific certainty, if there is a risk of serious or irreversible harm to the environment, precautionary measures must be taken.

M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India (1987): This case established the principle of polluter pays, which holds that the polluter must bear the cost of pollution. The principle has been applied to various industries, including the firecracker industry.

Vellore Citizens Forum vs. Union of India (2011): In this case, the Supreme Court recognized the right to a healthy environment as a part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. The court also emphasized the need for environmental impact assessments to prevent pollution.

BALANCING THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL

The Supreme Court’s decision is also a significant development in the interpretation of fundamental rights. The court recognised that the right to celebrate Diwali is a fundamental right, but it is not absolute. The court held that the right to celebrate Diwali must be exercised in a manner that does not infringe upon the fundamental right to clean air and a healthy environment.

This decision is a reminder that all rights must be exercised in a responsible manner. The right to celebrate Diwali does not give individuals the right to harm the environment or the health of others. The Supreme Court’s decision is expected to have a significant impact on future cases involving conflicts between individual rights and environmental protection. The court’s ruling sets a strong precedent for future cases and will likely be cited in many future legal challenges.

The decision is also a reminder that the courts have a crucial role in protecting the environment. The courts can use their power to enforce environmental laws and regulations and to hold individuals and businesses accountable for their actions.

CONCLUSION

The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the ban on firecrackers is a landmark ruling that prioritizes public health and environmental protection while upholding fundamental rights. The decision is a testament to the court’s commitment to upholding the Constitution and ensuring the well-being of all citizens.

By upholding the ban, the court has sent a clear message that public health and environmental protection are paramount. The decision is expected to have a significant impact on air quality during Diwali, particularly in urban areas, and contribute to a healthier environment for all.

Tammana Bahl Oberoi Law Chambers Contact Us

[blublopplop]

[indizombie]

Reservation is not a poverty alleviation mechanism. Reservation was always implemented to address representation or the lack thereof in educational institutions and public employment. The Supreme Court has failed to recognise that the 103rd Constitutional Amendment has relied on economic criteria to extend reservations, something that has been expressly barred in law. In Indra Sawhney vs Union (1992), it has been categorically held that in the determination of backwardness, economic condition can never be the sole criterion. The reason for this is that income is a variable factor and not a structural or systematic tool for discrimination. On the other hand, caste is structural and systematic discrimination and poverty is a consequence of such discrimination.

Manuraj Shunmugasundaram, ‘EWS judgment is a setback to social justice, India’s constitutional scheme’, Indian Express

[insiderbusiness]

The Supreme Court’s orders are to be relaxed for the Heera Group’s investors.