In several orders including Anthony Michael Emmanuel Fernando v. Sri Lanka, 2005 SCC OnLine HRC 22, decided by the United Nations Human Rights Committee (a […]
Author: youngadvocatescouncil511@gmail.com
The Supreme Court rule permitting dismissal of a review petition without hearing and without recording reasons is unconstitutional, as it violates fundamental rights, denies fair procedure, and disregards the caution expressed by the Seven-Judge Constitution Bench.
Various Bar Association wrote CJI to struck down Order XLVII Rule 3 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013. Earlier, in Prem Chand Garg v. Excise […]
Two Major Setbacks to Bombay Bar Association: Supreme Court and Bombay High Court Full Bench Rulings Expose BBA to Potential Prosecution and Liability for Damages to Google, Rashid Khan Pathan, Adv. Vijay Kurle, Adv. Nilesh Ojha and Others
Supreme Court Judgment in Nirbhay Singh Suliya v. State of M.P., 2026 SCC OnLine SC 8 on Action Against Judges and Advocates Demonstrates the Lack […]
Two Supreme Court Judges Confirmed Death Sentences of Six Innocents- After Ten Years a Larger Bench Corrected the Mistake, Acquitted Them, and Awarded Compensation – Ankush Maruti Shinde v. State of Maharashtra (2019) 15 SCC 470
The criminal justice system is built on the sacred principle that no innocent person should ever be punished, especially not with the irreversible punishment of […]
सर्वोच्च न्यायालय व मुंबई उच्च न्यायालयाची ऐतिहासिक चूक [भाग–1]- सहा निरपराधांना फाशी – दहा वर्षांनी सर्वोच्च न्यायालयाच्या वरिष्ठ पीठाकडून मृत्युदंड रद्द, निर्दोष मुक्तता व ₹30 लाख नुकसानभरपाईचे आदेश [अंकुश मारुती शिंदे विरुद्ध महाराष्ट्र राज्य (2019) 15 SCC 470]
भारतीय फौजदारी न्यायव्यवस्था या मूलभूत तत्त्वावर उभी आहे की “100 आरोपी सुटले तरी चालतील, परंतु कोणत्याही निरपराध व्यक्तीला शिक्षा होता कामा नये.” तरीसुद्धा अंकुश मारुती […]
सर्वोच्च न्यायालय और मुंबई उच्च न्यायालय की ऐतिहासिक भूल [भाग–1] – छह निर्दोषों को फाँसी की सज़ा – दस वर्ष बाद सर्वोच्च न्यायालय की वरिष्ठ पीठ द्वारा मृत्युदंड रद्द, निर्दोष मुक्ति और ₹30 लाख मुआवज़े के आदेश (अंकुश मारुति शिंदे बनाम महाराष्ट्र राज्य, (2019) 15 SCC 470)
भारतीय आपराधिक न्याय प्रणाली इस मूलभूत सिद्धांत पर आधारित है कि “भले ही सौ अपराधी छूट जाएँ, परंतु एक भी निर्दोष को दंडित नहीं किया […]
Constitutional Remedies Against Unlawful Supreme Court Orders Violating Your Rights: Orders Passed on Misrepresentation of Parties or mistake of the Judge can be corrected by the Supreme Court.
Practical Application of Order LV Rule 6 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 and Articles 32, 136, 142, and 129 of the Constitution of India […]
Two Benches, Two Approaches: The Approach of Justice Vikram Nath Shook Public Confidence and the Legal Fraternity, While the Approach of CJI Surya Kant Restored Faith in Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court of India is not merely a court of law—it is the ultimate guardian of the Constitution and the final refuge of the […]
When Is a Writ Petition Maintainable Against Unlawful Orders of the Supreme Court?
Although the petition filed by Adv. Mathew Nedumpara fell within the recognized legal parameters for maintainability, the responsibility for its dismissal rests with Adv. Nedumpara […]
[FACT-CHECK] Whether the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) can conduct an inquiry against Hon’ble Justices Sh. Vikram Nath and Sh. Sandeep Mehta in terms of the directions laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Ram Deo Chauhan v. Bani Kanta Das, (2010) 14 SCC 209, with respect to alleged violations of the fundamental rights of advocates, Smt. Menka Gandhi, and others?
(I) Whether the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) can conduct an inquiry against Hon’ble Justices Sh. Vikram Nath and Sh. Sandeep Mehta in terms of […]