Skip to main content

10 Significant Supreme Court judgements that had a profound impact on nations politics by GPT 4.0

 Here are ten more significant Supreme Court judgments in India that had a profound impact on the nation's political and social fabric:


1. Nandini Sundar & Others v. State of Chhattisgarh (2011): This judgement was critical in the context of state-sponsored vigilantism. The Court declared the Chhattisgarh government's support of the Salwa Judum (a civilian militia) as unconstitutional and a violation of human rights, impacting the approach towards internal security and human rights.


2. Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): This case expanded the interpretation of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution to include the right to live with dignity. It also established that laws depriving a person of personal liberty must be fair, just, and reasonable.


3. Shah Bano Case (1985): Though already mentioned, its political impact merits reiteration. The judgement, granting alimony to a divorced Muslim woman, led to significant political controversies and the passing of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986.


4. I.R. Coelho (Dead) By LRs v. State of Tamil Nadu (2007): This case reaffirmed the Basic Structure doctrine established in Kesavananda Bharati's case. The Court held that laws placed in the Ninth Schedule of the Constitution (and thus immune from judicial review) after April 24, 1973, could be subject to scrutiny if they violated the Basic Structure of the Constitution.


5. Union Carbide Corporation v. Union of India (1989): In the aftermath of the Bhopal Gas Tragedy, this judgement, which settled the compensation amount for the victims, had significant political and legal ramifications regarding industrial safety and environmental law.


6. Olga Tellis & Others v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985): This case is significant for the rights of the urban poor. The Court held that the right to livelihood is an integral part of the right to life, thereby providing some degree of protection against the eviction of pavement dwellers in Bombay.


7. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) and Another v Union Of India And Others (2017): This landmark judgement recognized privacy as a fundamental right under the Constitution, thus having far-reaching implications on personal liberty, surveillance, data protection, and individual autonomy.


8. Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Nadu (1994): This case was pivotal for freedom of the press and privacy rights. The Court held that the right to privacy cannot be used to suppress publication of matters of public record, including court records and documents.


9. Navtej Singh Johar & Others v. Union of India (2018): Already mentioned, but its significance in decriminalising homosexuality and affirming the dignity, equality, and rights of the LGBTQ community in India cannot be overstated.


10. Public Interest Foundation & Others v. Union of India (2019): This judgement directed political parties to publish the criminal records of their candidates for elections. It was a significant step towards transparency in the electoral process.


Each of these cases reflects the Supreme Court's crucial role in interpreting the Constitution and shaping societal norms and governance in India.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Factortame Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport (1990)" by GPT4.0

  "Factortame Ltd v Secretary of State for Transport (1990)" is a landmark case in UK constitutional and European Union law. The case is particularly notable for its implications regarding the supremacy of European Union law over national laws of member states. Here's a detailed summary: Background - Date: 1990 - Parties: Factortame Ltd (Appellant) vs. Secretary of State for Transport (Respondent) - Context: The case involved a conflict between British legislation and European Community law. Facts - Legislation in Question: The UK's Merchant Shipping Act 1988 imposed certain conditions on fishing vessels registered in the UK, affecting many Spanish fishermen who operated in British waters under the British flag. - Issue: Factortame Ltd, representing the interests of these Spanish fishermen, argued that the Act contravened European Community law, specifically the principle of freedom of establishment. Legal Proceedings - Application for Interim Relief: Factortame sough...
Post a Comment
Read more

"Phipps v Rochester Corporation (1955)" by GPT4.0

  "Phipps v Rochester Corporation (1955)" is a notable case in English tort law, particularly concerning the duty of care owed to children. This case is important in understanding how the law views the responsibilities of both children and those responsible for areas accessible to children. Here's a detailed summary: Background - Date: 1955 - Parties: Michael Phipps (a minor, represented by his father) vs. Rochester Corporation - Context: The case involved a child who was injured while playing on a housing development site. Facts - Incident: Michael Phipps, a five-year-old boy, was playing with his seven-year-old sister on a housing estate being built by the Rochester Corporation. During their play, Michael fell into a trench and was injured. - Parental Supervision: At the time of the incident, the children were unsupervised. Legal Proceedings - Claim: The parents of Michael Phipps sued the Rochester Corporation for negligence, claiming that the corporation had failed to ...
Post a Comment
Read more

"Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (2003)" by GPT4.0

  "Shamoon v Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (2003)" is a significant case in UK employment law, particularly concerning the issue of sex discrimination. This case provides insight into how employment tribunals approach claims of unfair treatment and discrimination in the workplace. Background - Date: 2003 - Parties: Christine Shamoon (Appellant) vs. Chief Constable of the Royal Ulster Constabulary (Respondent) - Context: The case involved an employment dispute in the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC), now known as the Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI). Facts - Position and Issue: Christine Shamoon held a senior position in the RUC. She claimed she was unfairly treated in a staff appraisal process and subsequently removed from her post. - Claim: Shamoon argued that her treatment constituted sex discrimination. Legal Proceedings - Initial Tribunal: The employment tribunal initially found in favor of Shamoon, agreeing that she had been unfairly treated. -...
Post a Comment
Read more