LawLoveLegal

The Madras High Court has directed Air India Limited to compensate a passenger with ₹35,000 after he suffered vomiting sensations and stomach pain from consuming a meal that contained a strand of hair . The ruling reinforces the principle that airlines are liable for negligence in services provided to passengers, even when outsourced to third-party caterers. Background of the Case The case arose when a passenger onboard an Air India flight consumed food supplied by the airline, only to find a hair follicle in the meal. The passenger experienced immediate nausea, vomiting, and stomach pain, and subsequently lodged a complaint upon landing. The trial court had earlier directed Air India to pay ₹1 lakh in damages for negligence. Air India appealed against this decision, arguing that the food was prepared by an external caterer — Ambassador Pallava Hotel — and that the airline itself could not be held directly responsible. Court’s Observations and Findings Justice P. B. Ba...

The ongoing constitutional debate on the powers of governors and the President regarding pending state bills took a sharp turn as the Union government argued before the Supreme Court that states have no legal right to approach the top court under Article 32 to allege violation of their rights due to delayed or withheld assent. This submission came during the hearing of President Droupadi Murmu’s Article 143 reference in May, which seeks clarity on the April 8 Supreme Court ruling that prescribed timelines for the President and governors to act on pending bills. Key Arguments from the Union Government Appearing before a five-judge Constitution Bench led by Chief Justice of India Bhushan R Gavai , Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta asserted that: States Cannot Claim Fundamental Rights The Constitution confers fundamental rights on citizens and individuals, not governments. A state is “the State” as defined under Article 12 and is a repository of duties , not a hold...

The Supreme Court of India, in a significant ruling, has reiterated that the gravity of a crime alone is insufficient to impose the death penalty unless the judicial process leading to the sentencing is scrupulously fair, transparent, and in strict compliance with constitutional safeguards . This judgment, delivered in the case involving death row convict Vasant Sampat Dupare , is a reminder of India’s strong constitutional framework that upholds life, dignity, and justice , even for those convicted of heinous crimes. The Fragility of the Death Penalty System A bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol, and Sandeep Mehta emphasized the irreversible nature of capital punishment and the risk of wrongful convictions. The judgment pointed out that investigations in India often rely on confessions extracted under opacity, contested recoveries, and forensic material of doubtful rigor , which when coupled with an overburdened trial system, increases the risk of errors. “A Constituti...

Introduction The Supreme Court of India has raised a crucial constitutional question: Can the apex court remain powerless if the President or state governors indefinitely withhold assent to bills passed by duly elected legislatures? The matter came up while examining President Droupadi Murmu’s Article 143 reference filed in May 2025, seeking clarity on the judiciary’s role in enforcing timelines for assent to legislation. This debate strikes at the heart of India’s separation of powers and federal structure , questioning whether constitutional discretion vested in high offices should be judicially regulated when used to indefinitely stall governance. Background: The Tamil Nadu Bills Case This presidential reference stems from the Supreme Court’s April 8, 2025 judgment concerning Tamil Nadu Governor R.N. Ravi’s prolonged inaction over several state bills. The Court invoked Article 142 to deem 10 Tamil Nadu bills as assented to , holding that the governor’s delay was “ille...

Introduction The Constitution (One Hundred and Thirtieth Amendment) Bill, 2025, introduced in the Lok Sabha (Bill No. 111 of 2025), seeks to address a significant constitutional vacuum. At present, there is no explicit provision in the Indian Constitution for the removal of a Prime Minister, Chief Minister, or Minister who is arrested and detained in custody on serious criminal charges. This Bill aims to set a framework to safeguard constitutional morality, public trust, and good governance . Key Amendments Proposed 1. Amendment to Article 75 (Union Ministers) A Union Minister, including the Prime Minister, who is arrested and detained for 30 consecutive days on charges punishable with imprisonment of five years or more , shall be removed from office . The President shall act on the advice of the Prime Minister. If the Prime Minister himself is in custody, he must resign within 31 days . If not, he will automatically cease to hold office. 2. Amendment to Article 164...

The race for India’s next Vice President is heating up, with the NDA nominating CP Radhakrishnan , a seasoned BJP leader and former Governor, and the INDIA bloc fielding Justice B Sudershan Reddy , a retired Supreme Court judge known for his sharp legal acumen. Both candidates bring contrasting backgrounds and ideologies, making the upcoming election a significant moment in Indian politics. CP Radhakrishnan: The NDA’s Choice CP Radhakrishnan filed his nomination papers in the presence of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and senior Union Ministers including Amit Shah, Rajnath Singh, and Nitin Gadkari. A veteran politician, Radhakrishnan: Served as a two-time Lok Sabha MP from Coimbatore (1998, 1999). Held governorship roles in Jharkhand, Telangana, Puducherry, and currently Maharashtra . Has deep grassroots connections in Tamil Nadu , having begun his journey from the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and Jana Sangh in the 1970s. Played key roles in Parliamentary committ...

KTR Urges Rahul Gandhi to Walk the Talk on 'Paanch Nyay' Background: The Supreme Court's Ruling on Defection On July 31, the Supreme Court delivered a significant verdict reinforcing constitutional accountability in cases of political defection. The ruling has ignited political tensions in Telangana, where the Bharat Rashtra Samithi (BRS) has accused the ruling Congress party of engineering mass defections to consolidate power.

Bail Pleas Reserved by Delhi High Court On July 3, 2025, the Delhi High Court reserved its order on the bail pleas filed by Sharjeel Imam , Umar Khalid , and six other accused in connection with the 2020 North-East Delhi riots larger conspiracy case . The division bench comprising Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur reserved the matter after hearing arguments from both the prosecution and defence. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta Leads Opposition to Bail Appearing for the State, Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta opposed the bail pleas, citing the grave implications of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) . He emphasized that the case involved mass violence impacting national security and territorial integrity , and hence bail should not be granted lightly. SG Mehta was accompanied by Special Public Prosecutors Amit Prasad and Madhukar Pandey , and Deputy Commissioner of Police Pramod Kushwaha also attended the hearing. Allegations of Terrorism and ...

Former Bureaucrats and Defence Officials Seek Judicial Intervention In a significant development, five eminent citizens—including retired civil servants, defence officials, and a former government-appointed interlocutor—have jointly penned an open letter addressed to Chief Justice of India, BR Gavai , urging the Supreme Court of India to take suo motu cognisance of the continued delay in restoring full statehood to Jammu and Kashmir . The petitioners include: Radha Kumar , former member of the Group of Interlocutors for J&K Gopal Pillai , former Union Home Secretary Major General Ashok K. Mehta (Retd.) , Indian Army Air Vice Marshal Kapil Kak (Retd.) , Indian Air Force Amitabha Pande , former Union Secretary, Inter-State Council Statehood Assurances Unfulfilled Since Abrogation of Article 370 The plea is rooted in the concerns that despite repeated assurances from the Union Government —both inside and outside Parliament—and the 2023 Supreme Court verdict ,...

ECI Contemplates Door-to-Door Electoral Roll Verification in Bihar In a significant move aimed at enhancing the credibility and accuracy of the electoral process, the Election Commission of India (ECI) is considering an intensive house-to-house verification during the revision of electoral rolls ahead of the upcoming Bihar Assembly Elections . This is expected to be one of the most comprehensive voter verification initiatives since the last such effort undertaken in 2004 . Addressing Long-Standing Concerns Over Voter Data Accuracy Over the years, various civil society groups, political stakeholders, and electoral observers have raised concerns about the inclusion of ineligible names and the deletion of legitimate voters from electoral rolls. The proposed exercise aims to eliminate duplicate, erroneous, or outdated entries , while ensuring that genuine voters are not left out . The ECI has consistently reiterated its commitment to a clean and inclusive voter list , ensuring ...

Background: Presidential Reference under Article 143 In a significant constitutional development, the President of India has invoked Article 143 of the Constitution to seek the Supreme Court’s advisory opinion on the issue of timelines for granting assent to state legislature-passed bills. This move comes in the wake of the Supreme Court’s landmark April 8, 2025 verdict , which attempted to establish fixed time frames for the President and Governors to approve or act upon bills passed by state legislatures. The Trigger: SC's April 8 Verdict on Gubernatorial Delays The issue originates from the case State of Tamil Nadu vs. Governor of Tamil Nadu & Anr. , where the Tamil Nadu Government challenged the delay by the Governor in granting assent to several bills passed by the state assembly. The Supreme Court, citing the absence of a specific timeline under Articles 200 and 201 , invoked Article 142 to direct the President and Governors to act within three months on such ...

Background of the Case On May 15, 2025, the Supreme Court of India expressed serious concern over the categorization of transgender persons as “risky” blood donors , questioning the constitutional validity of Sections 12 and 51 of the Blood Donor Guidelines, 2017 . A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh was hearing a petition filed by Thangjam Santa Singh , a Manipur-based transgender and social activist, challenging the blanket ban on blood donation by transgender individuals, men having sex with men (MSM), and female sex workers . These guidelines, issued by the National Blood Transfusion Council (NBTC) , classify these groups as “high risk” for infections like HIV, Hepatitis B, and Hepatitis C . Supreme Court’s Observations on Discrimination The Supreme Court questioned the constitutionality and fairness of these guidelines, particularly the blanket exclusion of the entire transgender community . The bench remarked: “Are we going to brand all transge...

  The Supreme Court of India is set to hear a crucial plea challenging the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 , on April 1, 2024 . The Act, which preserves the religious character of places of worship as they existed on August 15, 1947 , is facing multiple legal challenges that question its constitutional validity. Key Details of the Hearing A bench of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar will hear the plea. The petition seeks permission for courts to ascertain the original religious character of disputed places of worship. Petitioner’s Arguments Against the Act The petition, filed by law student Nitin Upadhyay , argues that: The right to judicial remedy is a fundamental right and cannot be restricted by the government. Section 4(2) of the Act bars legal proceedings to alter the religious character of any place of worship, which violates the basic structure of the Constitution . While the Act mandates preservation ...

  Introduction The recent controversy surrounding stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra has reignited the debate on freedom of speech and expression in India. The Madras High Court granted Kamra interim anticipatory bail in multiple FIRs lodged against him over his alleged remarks on Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Eknath Shinde. This article analyzes the case in the context of Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression, and its reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) . Kunal Kamra's Remarks and Legal Trouble Kunal Kamra, known for his satirical comedy, made controversial statements targeting Eknath Shinde. This led to multiple FIRs being filed against him. Kamra sought transit anticipatory bail from the Madras High Court, citing threats he received after his comments. The court granted him interim anticipatory bail until April 7 , subject to conditions. Mumbai police had earlier summoned Kamra for qu...

Delhi High Court Questions Delhi Government Over Delay in Action on CAG Reports The Delhi High Court has raised serious concerns about the Delhi Government's handling of the Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) reports, questioning its motives for delaying the process. The remarks came during a hearing involving a petition filed by BJP MLAs seeking the tabling of 14 CAG reports in the Delhi Legislative Assembly. Let’s delve into the key issues, the significance of CAG, and why this matter has become a topic of public interest. What is CAG and Its Role? The Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG) is a constitutional authority responsible for auditing all receipts and expenditures of the government, including public sector enterprises. Its reports hold the government accountable for the financial and operational efficiency of its departments. CAG reports are presented to the legislative assemblies, where they serve as a critical tool for legislators to debate and scruti...

Hindu Outfit Moves SC on Places of Worship Act: A Legal Battle for Religious Rights Introduction to the Plea The Akhil Bhartiya Sant Samiti, a Hindu organization, has approached the Supreme Court, seeking to intervene in cases challenging the validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 . This legislation maintains the religious character of places of worship as they stood on August 15, 1947 , preventing alterations or disputes about their status. The Samiti's plea argues that Sections 3 and 4 of the Act infringe on fundamental rights, including the right to equality and the freedom to practice religion. Key Provisions of the Act in Question Section 3 : Prohibits converting any place of worship from one religious denomination to another. Section 4 : Bars filing legal suits or initiating proceedings to alter the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947. The Act aims to ensure communal harmony by freezing the religious ...

Plea Filed in Supreme Court for Restoration of  Jammu and Kashmir’s Statehood A fresh plea has been filed in the Supreme Court  of India, urging the Court to issue directions for the immediate restoration of statehood to Jammu and Kashmir . The application, filed by Zahoor Ahmed Bhat (a college teacher) and activist Khurshaid Ahmad Malik , calls for a time-bound restoration of Jammu and Kashmir’s statehood, stating that the delay is causing significant harm to both the federal structure of the country and the fundamental rights of its citizens. Background and Key Points of the Plea Union Government’s Assurance The plea argues that despite assurances given by the Solicitor General of India that Jammu and Kashmir’s statehood would be restored, there has been no progress over the last ten months  since the Supreme Court’s decision on the abrogation of Article 370 . The petitioners have filed this application seeking a two-month timeframe  for the restoration of sta...