LawLoveLegal

On 20 November, the Supreme Court of India delivered a significant ruling clarifying the constitutional functions of Governors under Article 200 and the President under Article 201 . The judgment addressed multiple questions referred by the President concerning delays in granting assent to state legislation and the extent of judicial oversight in such matters. This decision is critical for understanding the federal framework, the balance of powers, and the constitutional mechanisms governing state legislation. Powers of the Governor Under Article 200 Constitutional Options Before a Governor When a Bill is presented to the Governor under Article 200 , the Governor has three constitutional options: Grant assent to the Bill. Withhold assent and return the Bill (with recommendations) to the Legislature. Reserve the Bill for the consideration of the President. The power to return a Bill with comments does not apply to Money Bills. Whether Governor Is Bound by Council of ...

Introduction The Supreme Court’s five-judge Constitution Bench has clarified a major constitutional question: courts cannot impose judicial timelines on governors or the President while granting assent to state legislation . This advisory opinion, delivered under Article 143 of the Constitution, reinforces the foundational principle of separation of powers , particularly regarding the relationship between the judiciary, the executive, and the federal structure. This ruling overturns an earlier two-judge judgment that had introduced strict timelines and the concept of "deemed assent," creating significant constitutional confusion. The Constitution Bench has now restored clarity and reaffirmed constitutional boundaries. Background of the Presidential Reference In May, the President of India referred a set of 14 constitutional questions to the Supreme Court under Article 143 . These questions arose from an April 8 judgment that: Imposed strict timelines on governors a...

The Supreme Court of India has raised strong concerns over the continued practice of Talaq-e-Hasan , a form of unilateral divorce under Muslim personal law that allows a husband to pronounce “talaq” once a month, over three months, to dissolve the marriage. The Court questioned whether such a practice can survive in a modern, constitutional democracy committed to gender equality and dignity. Supreme Court's Observation: A Question of Dignity and Modernity A bench led by Justice Surya Kant , and comprising Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and N. Kotiswar Singh , observed that the issue goes beyond the rights of an individual woman and concerns societal dignity and the constitutionally guaranteed status of women in India. The Court noted that if Talaq-e-Hasan is found to be discriminatory or arbitrary, it may require regulation or complete invalidation to align it with modern constitutional principles. Facts of the Case: The Petitioner's Challenge The Court was hearing petitions i...

Background of the Case The Allahabad High Court, in a recent ruling dated 7 November , declined to grant police protection to a couple claiming to be in a live-in relationship. The petition was filed by Sonam and her alleged partner (referred to as petitioner no. 2), who sought a writ of mandamus to restrain the woman’s husband and the police from interfering in their lives. The Court emphasized that the woman was still legally married under the Hindu Marriage Act , and therefore, the claimed “live-in relationship” could not be accorded legal protection. Court’s Key Observation: Freedom Cannot Override Legal Rights Freedom vs. Statutory Rights Justice Vivek Kumar Singh held that although an adult has autonomy over personal choices, including relationships, such autonomy is not absolute . The Court clarified that the right to personal liberty under the Constitution cannot be exercised to violate the statutory rights of another person . Quote from the judgment: “A spouse has sta...

The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday granted interim protection from arrest to actor Alok Nath in connection with a fraud case linked to a controversial marketing scheme in Haryana. The case involves allegations of large-scale cheating through a cooperative society that operated under the guise of financial savings schemes. Bench Issues Notice A bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan issued notice to the Haryana Police and other respondents after hearing the actor’s plea. The Court directed that no coercive steps should be taken against Alok Nath until the next date of hearing. The bench’s order is similar to an earlier decision where the top court had extended protection from arrest to actor Shreyas Talpade , who is also an accused in the same case. FIR and Allegations The case stems from a complaint filed by Vipul Antil , a 37-year-old resident of Sonepat, Haryana . He alleged that both Alok Nath and Shreyas Talpade promoted the cooperative s...

Introduction On September 12, the Supreme Court of India was advised to adopt a court-monitored hybrid resolution mechanism for the completion of the long-delayed Supernova project by Supertech Realtors in Noida. The suggestion comes in line with judicial interventions in stalled housing projects like Amrapali and Unitech , ensuring homebuyers’ interests are safeguarded when insolvency processes fail. About the Supernova Project Developer : Supertech Realtors (a wholly owned subsidiary of Supertech Ltd, currently facing insolvency proceedings). Project Type : Mixed-use development, including residential units, commercial spaces, offices, studio apartments, serviced apartments, and shopping centres . Location : Sector 94, Noida. Scale : An 80-floor skyscraper with a height of 300 metres , touted as the tallest building in Delhi-NCR . Stakeholders’ Confidence in Court-Monitored Resolution Advocate Rajiv Jain , assisting in the matter, told a bench of Justices Su...

  Congress Moves Supreme Court Seeking Intervention in 1991 Places of Worship Act Cases Introduction The Indian National Congress (INC) recently approached the Supreme Court, seeking intervention in cases challenging the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 . The Act, which preserves the religious character of places of worship as they stood on August 15, 1947 , has been the subject of multiple legal disputes. The Congress emphasized its pivotal role in enacting the law and its commitment to defending the secular fabric of India. Background of the 1991 Places of Worship Act (POWA) The Places of Worship Act was enacted by the Parliament in 1991 to: Prohibit the conversion of any place of worship from its original religious character. Preserve the status quo of religious structures as they existed on August 15, 1947. Impose strict penalties for any violations of the Act. The legislation exempted the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid ...

Opposition to Legalizing Same-Sex Marriage in India: State Perspectives State Opposition to Same-Sex Marriage: The Central government has informed the Supreme Court about the opposition from Assam, Andhra Pradesh, and Rajasthan regarding the legalization of same-sex marriages in India. This disclosure emerged during a hearing before a five-judge Constitution bench addressing petitions advocating for marriage equality rights for the LGBTQIA+ community. Responses from State Governments: Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Centre, revealed that these states conveyed their stance in response to the Union government's inquiry on the issue of same-sex marriage. The Centre had sent a letter to all states on April 18, soliciting their opinions on the matter. Divergent State Views: Among the states that responded, Assam, Rajasthan, and Andhra Pradesh opposed the legalization of same-sex marriage. Conversely, Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Manipur, and Sikkim requested additional t...