Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India [ 1 ] is a judgement by a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India in 2015, on the issue of online speech and intermediary liability in India.
UOI (2014), Puttaswamy v. UOI (2017) and Navtej Singh Johar v. UOI (2018), the petitioners argued for extending the right to marry and establish a family to sexual and gender minority individuals based on Articles 14, 15, 19, 21 and 25 of the Indian Constitution. [6] High Courts have considered the constitutionality of Indian marriage laws.
Shreya Singhal is an Indian lawyer. Her fight against Section 66A of the Information Technology Act of 2000 in 2015 brought her to national prominence in India. [1]
Supreme Court of India, in its judgement dated 10 July 2013 while disposing the Lily Thomas v. Union of India case (along with Lok Prahari v. Union of India), [1] ruled that any Member of Parliament (MP), Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) or Member of the Legislative Council (MLC) who is convicted of a crime and given a minimum of two years' imprisonment, loses membership of the House ...
It included within the moral right of integrity the right to protect an artistic work from outright destruction. The interim decision in the case, given by Justice Jaspal Singh, given in favour of the plaintiff, restricted the Indian Government from causing any further loss to the plaintiff by destroying the property.
The Center for Communication Governance noted that this case is significant for India's Supreme Court, as it will establish the boundaries of free speech online. [6] CNN reported that prior to the verdict, Mouthshut.com had raised its concerns to the Indian Supreme Court, claiming that it aimed to safeguard the rights of Indian citizens and ...
Building of the Supreme Court of India. The case was filed as a public interest civil writ petition by T. S. R. Subramanian, retired Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer and former Cabinet Secretary; T. S. Krishnamurthy, retired IAS officer and former Chief Election Commissioner; N. Gopalaswami, retired IAS officer and former Chief Election Commissioner; Abid Hussain, retired IAS ...
Singh also said that because the Article 239AA of the Constitution of India came under the section for union territories, Delhi was a union territory. [ 61 ] While hearing the case, the supreme court said Delhi's lieutenant governor had more powers than state governors , who were supposed to generally follow the aid and advice of the state ...