Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Atypical families are deserving of equal protection under law and benefits available under social welfare legislation. Decision by. D. Y. Chandrachud and A. S. Bopanna. Deepika Singh versus Central Administrative Tribunal & Ors. (2022) is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India that widens the definition of 'family' under Indian law.
Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam. Status: In force. The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) (IAST: Bhāratīya Nāgarik Surakśa Saṃhitā; lit. 'Indian Citizen Safety Code '), is the main legislation on procedure for administration of substantive criminal law in India. [1][2][3][4]
Supriyo a.k.a Supriya Chakraborty & Abhay Dang v. Union of India thr. Its Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice & other connected cases (2023) are a collection of landmark cases of the Supreme Court of India, which were filed to consider whether to extend right to marry and establish a family to sexual and gender minority individuals in India. [4]
Judges sitting. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit (CJI), Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, Justice Bela M Trivedi, Justice J B Pardiwala, and Justice Shripathi Ravindra Bhat. Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India (WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO. 55 OF 2019), also known as the EWS Reservation case, was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India.
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) (IAST: Bhāratīya Nyāya Saṃhitā; lit. 'Indian Justice Code') is the official criminal code in India. It came into effect on 1 July, 2024 after being passed by the parliament in December 2023 to replace the Indian Penal Code (IPC), which dated back to the period of British India.
The Manoj–Babli honour killing case was the honour killing of Indian newlyweds Manoj Banwala and Babli in June 2007 and the subsequent court case which historically convicted defendants for an honour killing. The accused in the murder included relatives of Babli (grandfather Gangaraj, who is said to have been a Khap leader, [ 1 ] brother ...
The Attorney General of India K K Venugopal had opposed the elevation of privacy as a fundamental right, representing the stance of the Union government of India in the Supreme Court. The previous Attorney General, Mukul Rohatgi , had opposed the right to privacy entirely, but Venugopal, while opposing the right, conceded that privacy could be ...
Keywords. Criminalization of Homosexuality, Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation. Navtej Singh Johar & Ors. v. Union of India thr. Secretary Ministry of Law and Justice (2018) is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of India that decriminalised all consensual sex among adults, including homosexual sex. [1]