Citation: AIR 1982 SC 1473, 1983 SCR (1) 456
Indiakanoon link: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/496663/
[related_posts_by_tax title=”5 Recently Updated Posts, Similar or Related To Above Post” orderby=”post_modified” posts_per_page=”5″ show_date=”true”]
Month: December 2018
Writ Petition in High Court of AP to get 125 CrPC Stuck Down from CrPC Statute
Taking lead from here, Here is the structure to the contents of the proposed Writ Petition to get 125 CrPC Stuck Down from CrPC Statute to be filed in High Court of AP in 2019.
Problem Statement:
To show violation of a Fundamental Right bestowed upon all citizens by Article 21 of Constitution of India, for it is only for enforcement right that a writ petition can be maintained in this Court under Article 226.
[related_posts_by_tax title=”5 Recently Updated Posts, Similar or Related To Above Post” orderby=”post_modified” posts_per_page=”5″ show_date=”true”]
Mamta Gautam Wankhede Vs Gautam Sukhdev Wankhede on 2 February, 2018
In this wonderful judgment from Hon’ble High Court of Bombay, the Hon’ble Justice has rubbed in it the lower court magistrate without any tolerance. See the rotten mindsets of magistrates of lower courts.
From Para 8,
The learned Magistrate has gone on record saying that filing of divorce petition by the respondent against the petitioner after 23 years of marriage itself amounted to domestic violence. The remark is outlandish and, if I may say so, is alien to the known jurisprudential concepts. If this is the way how the applications filed under Section 12 of the D.V. Act are decided, as has been done in the present case by the learned Magistrate, as rightly submitted by the learned Counsel for the respondents, all the provisions of law, be they be from Hindu Code Bill or Family Courts Act or D.V.Act, creating rights and obligations of parties while maintaining a fine balance between the competing interests of both sides, would be rendered nugatory and a party would dither to initiate a proceeding for assertion of his right, for the fear of being labelled as merchant of domestic violence. The learned Magistrate shall do well to avoid making such remarks without giving any thought to rights and obligations of parties under the law.
This judgment also relies on another Bombay High Court judgment from 2014, available here.
B.Prakash Vs Deepa on 28 July, 2015
In this wonderful landmark judgment, Justice Shri Nagamuthu has delivered a death-knell to the false case filing lair knifes.
From Para 13,
Now, the question is as to whether the wife, who has been neglected by her husband or refused to be maintained, is aggrieved person, as defined in Section 2(a) of the Act. In other words, whether such neglect or refusal by the husband would amount to domestic violence as defined in Section 3 of the Act.
From Para 15,
For the wife, maintenance paid by way of maintenance amount payable by the husband is a financial resource for her. Similarly, the denial of household necessities of the wife is also an economic abuse. The husband is bound to maintain the wife. If he neglects or fails to maintain, the wife is deprivation of her financial resources to maintain herself and to meet her household necessities. Denial of either of these two would amount to economic abuse. Such economic abuse will amount to domestic violence. The wife, who is the victim of such domestic violence, is, therefore, entitled for monetary relief under Section 20 of the Act.
From Para 17,
The next question, which arises for consideration, is as to whether an order for maintenance made by a Magistrate under Section 125 of the Code, shall be a bar for a Magistrate acting under Section 20 of the Act to pass an order for maintenance. In this regard, again, we should have a look into the Section 20(1)(d) of the Act, which states that the monetary relief granted under Section 20 of the Act may include an order for maintenance, in addition to an order of maintenance under Section 125 of the Code. Thus, it is crystal clear that a previous order for maintenance passed by a Magistrate under Section 125 of the Code, is not a bar for a Magistrate acting under Section 20 of the Act to pass yet another order granting monetary relief under Section 20 of the Act, by way of maintenance under Section 125 of the Code. Here, it needs to be noted that the subsequent order made under Section 20 of the Act is not in any way in modification or variation of the earlier order made under Section 125 of the Code by a Magistrate.
From Para 18,
If the wife wants to modify an order made under Section 125 of the Code, seeking enhancement of the maintenance amount, the only option available for her is to file a petition under Section 127 of the Code before the same Magistrate, who passed the order. In other words, the order made under Section 125 of the Code can be modified or varied only by the same Magistrate, who passed the earlier order. An order made under Section 125 of the Code for maintenance by one Magistrate cannot be varied or modified by a Magistrate acting under Section 20 of the Act. Therefore, it should be noted that a monetary relief granted towards maintenance under Section 20 of the Act may be not in modification of the previous order for maintenance passed under Section 125 of the Code, but it may be in addition to the said order for maintenance passed under Section 125 of the Code. If an order has already been made under Section 125 of the Code for maintenance, there can be no doubt that the wife had proved either neglect or refusal on the part of the husband. If the wife wants an order under Section 20 of the Act, in addition to the order under Section 125 of the Code, she has to prove fresh acts of the husband constituting the domestic violence subsequent to the passing of the earlier order under Section 125 of the Code. She cannot rely on the acts of the husband constituting domestic violence, which happened prior to the passing of the order under Section 125 of the Code. For getting an order under Section 20 of the Act, in addition to the earlier order under Section 125 of the Code, the wife should plead and prove that subsequent to the said order made under Section 125 of the Code, the husband had caused domestic violence and on account of the same, she had suffered loss and thus, she is entitled for additional amount as maintenance. Thus, it is manifestly clear that a previous order made under Section 125 of the Code is not a bar for an aggrieved wife to approach a Magistrate under Section 20 of the Act, for monetary relief as an additional relief of maintenance, provided subsequent to the passing of the earlier order under under Section 125 of the Code, the husband has committed domestic violence resulting loss to the wife.
From Para 19,
In this regard, we may also take note of Section 36 of the Act, which states that the provisions of this Act shall be in addition to and in derogation of the provisions of any other law, for the time being in force, which means Section 20 of the Act is not in derogation of Section 125 of the Code. It also needs to be clarified that as and when there is neglect or refusal on the part of the husband to maintain the wife, she has got option either to seek remedy under Section 125 of the Code or under Section 20 of the Act. If she elects to make a claim under Section 125 of the Code, on the same cause of action, she cannot, simultaneously, make a claim under Section 20 of the Act and vice versa. On the said cause of action, if the Magistrate dismisses the claim made by the petitioner under Section 125 of the Code, then, on the same set of allegation and cause of action, the wife cannot change her course and make a claim under Section 20 of the Act. Similarly, having elected to approach the Court under Section 20 of the Act, after having failed in her attempt to get maintenance, on the same set of allegations and cause of action, she cannot make a fresh allegation under Section 125 of the Code for maintenance. Having chosen one forum, if the aggrieved wants to approach the other forum, such approach could be made only on fresh grounds, which occurred subsequent to the order passed by the other forum.
Citation: 2016 All MR(Cri)168,
This was referred to in this 2018 judgment here.
[related_posts_by_tax title=”5 Recently Updated Posts, Similar or Related To Above Post” orderby=”post_modified” posts_per_page=”5″ show_date=”true”]
S.Suriya Devi Vs Thilip Kumar on 26 June, 2018
In this wonderful judgment, Justice Shri M.S.Ramesh has held that “The petitioner herein having chosen to invoke the provisions of the Domestic Violence Act seeking for monetary relief under Section 20(3), cannot subsequently invoke Section 125 Cr.P.C., for maintenance on the same set of facts and cause of action in view of my reasonings given above.” The cunning knife had her teeth broken and sent back for trying to manipulate and gain illegal benefits from Hon’ble Courts.
The government is equally to blame for causing such situation, whereby, a complainant is given two ‘options’ for same set of cause of action, under civil law itself. This is a clear case of aiding Double Jeopardy and needs to be dealt with iron fists of Judiciary.
T.V.Vatheeswaran Vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 16 February, 1983
In this judgment, Hon’ble Apex Court has held that, delay in executing a death sentence is violation of Article 21 of Constitution of India.
Case background:
A prisoner condemned to death over eight years ago claims that it is not lawful to hang him now. Let us put the worst against him first. He was the principal accused in the case and, so to say, the archvillian of a villainous piece. He was the brain behind a cruel conspiracy to impersonate Customs officers’ pretend to question unsuspecting visitors to the city of Madras, abduct them on the pretext of interrogating them, administer sleeping pills to the unsuspecting victims steal their cash and jewels and finally murder them. The plan was ingeniously fiendish and the appellant was the architect. There is no question that the learned Sessions Judge very rightly sentenced him to death But that was in January 1975. Since then he has been kept in solitary confinement, quite contrary to our ruling in Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration(1). Before that he was a ’prisoner under remand’ for two years. So, the prisoner claims that to take away his life after keeping him in jail for ten years, eight of which in illegal solitary confinement, is a gross violation o the Fundamental Right guaranteed by Art. 21 af the Constitution.
Hon’ble Court rules:
So, what do we have now? Arts. 14, 19 and 21 are not mutually exclusive. They sustain, strengthen and nourish each other. They are available to prisoners as well as free men. Prison walls do not keep out Fundamental Rights. A person under sentence of death may also claim Fundamental Rights. The fiat of Art. 21, as explained, is that any procedure which deprives a person of his life or liberty must be just, fair and reasonable. Just, fair and reasonable procedure implies a right to free legal services where he cannot avail them. It implies a right to a speedy trial. It implies humane conditions of detection, preventive or punitive. ’Procedure established by law’ does not end with the pronouncement of sentence; it includes tho carrying out of sentence. That is as far as we have gone so far. It seems to us but a short step, but a step in the right direction, to hold that prolonged detention to await the execution of a sentence of death is an unjust, unfair and unreasonable procedure and the only way to undo the wrong is to quash the sentence of death.
Final Words:
What may be considered prolonged delay so as to attract the constitutional protection of Art. 21 against the execution of a sentence of death is a ticklish question. In Ediga Annamma’s case, two years was considered sufficient to justify interference with the sentence of death. In Bhagwan Baux’s case, two and a half years and in Sadhu Singh’s case, three and a half years were taken as sufficient to justify altering the sentence of death into one of imprisonment for life. The Code of Criminal Procedure provides that a sentence of death imposed by a court of Session must be confirmed by the High Court. The practice, to our knowledge, has always been to give top priority to the hearing of such cases by the High Courts. So, also in this Court. There are provisions in the Constitution (Arts. 72 and 161) which invest the President and the Governor with power to suspend, remit or commute a sentence of death. Making all reasonable allowance for the time necessary for appeal and considered of reprieve, we think that delay exceeding two years in the execution of a sentence of death should be considered sufficient to entitle the person under sentence of death to invoke Art. 21 and demand the quashing of the sentence of death. We therefore accept the special leave petition, allow the appeal as also the Writ Petition and quash the sentence of death. In the place of the sentence of death, we substitute the sentence of imprisonment for life.
Citation: AIR 1983 SC 361, 1983 AIR 361, 1983 SCR (2) 348, 1983 SCC (2) 68, 1983 SCALE (1)115
Indiankanoon link: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1536503/
[related_posts_by_tax title=”5 Recently Updated Posts, Similar or Related To Above Post” orderby=”post_modified” posts_per_page=”5″ show_date=”true”]
Additional District Magistrate, Jabalpur Vs S. S. Shukla Etc. Etc on 28 April, 1976
This judgment is considered a stain on the history of the court, which had delivered a judgment that has trummelled on the rights of citizens.
Case background:
The President of India, during the Emergency, made such a proclamation and many people were detained under various laws. Some of them moved high courts seeking a writ of habeas corpus. The Government said, since the right to move courts for the enforcement of Article 21 is suspended, the petitions were not maintainable.
Real Story:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Raj_Khanna#The_Habeas_Corpus_Case
https://www.bloombergquint.com/opinion/vr-krishna-iyer-the-super-judge#gs.89TGyeW0
Hon’ble Court rules:
The 4 out of 5 judges on the bench held that “The width and amplitude of the power of detention under section 3 of the Act is to be adjudged in the context of the emergency proclaimed by the President. The Court cannot compel the detaining authority to give the particulars of the grounds on which he had reasonable cause to believe that it was necessary to exercise this control. An investigation into facts or allegations of facts based on malafides is not permissible because such a course will involve advertence to the grounds of detention and materials constituting those grounds which is not competent in the context of the emergency”
Justice Hans Raj Khanna is the sole dissenting voice on the bench and after referring to earlier A.K.Gopalan case he held that “The argument that suspending the right of a person to move any court for the enforcement of right to life and personal liberty is done under a constitutional provision and, therefore, it cannot be said that the resulting situation would mean the absence of the Rule of law cannot stand close scrutiny for it tries to equate illusion of the Rule of Law with the reality of Rule of Law.“
And “The suspension of the right to move a court for the enforcement of the right contained in Art. 21 cannot have the effect of debarring an aggrieved person from approaching the courts with the complaint regarding deprivation of life or personal liberty by an authority on the score that no power has been vested in the authority to deprive a person of life or liberty. The pre-supposition of the existence of substantive power to deprive a person of his life or personal liberty in Art. 21 even though that article only mentions the procedure, would not necessarily point to the conclusion that in the event of the suspension of the right to move any court for the enforcement of Art. 21, the suspension would also dispense with the necessity of the existence of the substantive power The co-existence of substantive power and procedure established by law for depriving R person of his life and liberty which is implicit in Art. 21 would not lead to the result that even if there is suspension of the right regarding procedure, suspension would also operate upon the necessity of substantive power. What is true of a proposition need not be true of the converse of that proposition. The suspension of the right to make. any court for the enforcement of the right contained in Art. 21 may have the effect of dispensing with the necessity of prescribing procedure for the exercise.. Of substantive power to deprive a person of his life or personal liberty, it can in no case have the effect of permitting an authority to deprive a person of his life or personal liberty without the existence of substantive power. The close bond which is there between the existence of substantive power of depriving a Person of his life or personal liberty and the procedure for the exercise of that power, if the right contained in Art. 21 were in operation, would not necessarily hold good if that right were suspended because the removal of compulsion about the prescription of procedure for the exercise of the substantive power would not do away with the compulsion regarding the existence of that power.”
Final Words
There is no sufficient ground to interfere with the view taken by all the nine High Courts which went into the matter that the Presidential order dated June 27, 1975, did not affect the maintainability of the habeas corpus petitions to question the legality of the detention orders.
The principles which should be followed by the courts in dealing with petitions for writs of habeas corpus to challenge the legality of detention are well-established.
Unanimity obtained without sacrifice of conviction commends the decision to public confidence. Unanimity which is merely formal and which is recorded at the expense of strong conflicting views is not desirable in a court of last resort.
A dissent in a court of last resort is an appeal to the brooding spirit of the law, to the intelligence of a future day when a later decision may possibly correct the error into which the dissenting Judge believes the court have been betrayed.
Observation: Judges are not there simply to decide cases, but to decide them as they think they should be decided, and while it may be regrettable that they cannot always agree, it is better that their independence should be maintained and recognise than that unanimity should be secured through its sacrifice.
Citation: AIR 1976 SC 1207, 1976 SCR 172, 1976 SCC (2) 521
Indiankanoon link: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1735815/
[related_posts_by_tax title=”5 Recently Updated Posts, Similar or Related To Above Post” orderby=”post_modified” posts_per_page=”5″ show_date=”true”]
A.K. Gopalan Vs The State Of Madras, Union Of India on 19 May, 1950
This is one of the foremost judgments on the interpretation of Article 21 of Constitution of India. It was delivered by a constitutional bench of 6 judges including Hon’ble CJI, Shri Kania, Hiralal J.
Case background:
Mr. A.K. Gopalan was a communist leader who was detained to the Madras Jail, under Preventive Detention Act, 1950 and he challenged his detention by stating that, his personal liberty was being hampered as he had the right to equality of law.
Hon’ble Court rules:
The court held that the word used in Article 21 just meant procedural due process and since the preventive detention law under which Gopalan was detained was a valid law, Gopalan’s detention was lawful even though that law may have violated some of his other Fundamental Rights such has his Right to Freedom of Movement under Article 19, or, the detention was arbitrary under Article 14.
This doctrine is commonly known as “procedural due process”.
Citation: AIR 1950 SC 27, 1950 SCR 88
Indiankanoon link: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1857950/
The index page is here.
Legal Goals to Achieve under Judicial Activism (Via Public Interest Litigation)
Some goals to achieve by April, 2021. (Some ideas of Other High Courts to be implemented in AP and vice-versa here)
Note: The ones at the top are the Latest ones that I am working on. Closed ones slowly move down this list.
- File a PIL to seek disposal of pending Divorce cases within 1 year (or any reasonable amount of time)
- Source: https://www.shadesofknife.in/n-rajeev-vs-c-deepa-on-26-july-2023/
- File PIL to demand Revenue Divisional Officers/Sub-Collectors take up cases under Dowry Prohibition Act 1961, as mandated by Government of Andhra Pradesh under G.O.Ms.No. 69 dt: 24-Jun-1989 and G.O.Ms.No. 117 dt: 12-Dec-1997, instead of Police Department.
- Status: Heard by AP High Court (Court-1 comprising CJ-AP and Justice Ravi Cheemalapati) and ordered, Response be filed. Petition summary along with prayers available here.
- Update:
- Status: Heard by AP High Court (Court-1 comprising CJ-AP and Justice Ravi Cheemalapati) and ordered, Response be filed. Petition summary along with prayers available here.
- File PIL to establish online RTI facility for the State of A.P. under Right to Information Act similar to rtionline.gov.in (https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/sc-issues-notice-on-plea-to-set-up-online-rti-portals-in-states-147474)
- File a PIL seeking setting up on Online Portal and Complaint filing facility for
-
- AP State Human Rights Commissions
- AP State Police Complaints Authority
- High Court
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Status: Supreme Court passed Orders; Yet to be implemented.
- Progress by Others: here.
- Status: Preparing Initial Draft
-
- File PIL seeking Appointment of advocates, other than Public Prosecutors, to advise the Investigating Officer during investigation. APHC passed gazette vide notification dt: 06-Sep-2024, making amendments to AP Criminal Rules of Practice 1990, inserting a new Rule 81-A in this regard.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Case law: In Re To issues certain guidelines regarding inadequacies and deficiencies in criminal trials here.
- File PIL seeking Allowance of submission of Reportable judgments in digital/soft copy mode. Non-reportable case laws can still be submitted in hard-copy mode.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File Crl.P in my CFR case questioning the need for a permission petition when certified copies of Docket Orders.
- Status:
- Progress: Petition ready to be filed.
- Case law: Pfimex Pharmacauticals Limited Vs Garden Finance Ltd on 19 Jun 2000 here.
- File PIL seeking direction reading/striking down of Section 23(2) of PWDV Act 2005, since it is against Article 14 and 21 and also Principles of Natural justice/Audi Alterum Partem.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking direction from any HC, to strictly implement Dowry Rules 1985.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Approach: File RTI to all Marriage registrars/Home Dept if they are strictly implement Dowry Rules 1985, before registering marriages, also in spirit of Compulsory registration of Marriages Act.
- Progress:
- File PIL seeking Set of Marriage-and-related Laws as a guide to both Parties for all Religions. No need of hard copies. Soft copies can be sent to as many people on both sides of marriage, as necessary, during registration of marriage.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking install ‘Advanced Cardiac Life Support’ at High Court premises
- Idea: https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/delhi-high-court-directs-state-government-to-install-advanced-cardiac-life-support-at-high-court-premises
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking fixing or reading down of section 494 IPC since it is NOT applicable on Muslim men and Christians as much as it applies to Hindu men and women AND no exception was carved out for Muslim and Christians men either by Parliament or Judiciary.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking (en)forcement on the plastic manufacturers to *buy-back* their own products for recycling, re-purposing, resale?
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Idea: Jitender Yadav Vs Union of India
- File PIL to amend India’s Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (similar to that of Bangladesh’s Dowry Prohibition Act, 2018 here)
- Status: Filed into and numbered by AP High Court. Petition summary along with prayers available here.
- Update: Since PIP permission was denied, withdrew the petition.
- Update2: Focused on only one aspect and finished PIL here.
- Update3: Turned this into a WP instead of a PIL. About to file with AP High Court.
- Update4: WP (in the name of my parents) is filed on 14-09-2021. Initial hearing before admission on 20-09-2021. Progress is available here.
- Status: Filed into and numbered by AP High Court. Petition summary along with prayers available here.
- File PIL seeking State Public Health Act similar to Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Pradesh (Andhra Area) Public Health, Act, 1939) and Tamil Nadu (Tamil Nadu Public Health, Act, 1939).
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Link: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/kerala/64-years-on-state-yet-to-have-unified-public-health-act/article32544689.ece
- Link: https://theprint.in/judiciary/only-6-states-have-public-health-laws-8-have-no-plans-to-formulate-one-centre-tells-sc/531886/
- File PIL seeking discharging of under-trails who got bail but could not produce sureties as prescribed u/s first proviso and explanation given under section 436(1) CrPC.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking inclusion of Constitution of India as one Subject in the Curricula of all streams of education in India.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking Permission to send Notices to multiple addresses at once to save time in process serving/Notice delivering. Also multiple modes, including electronic delivery of notices via WhatsApp (or any such communications channel/platform) and email.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Link: https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2023/06/02/punjab-haryana-high-court-issues-guidelines-for-service-of-summons-through-whatsapp-electronic-media-legal-news/amp/
- File PIL seeking action by Election Commissions to allow filing of Nominations via online mode.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking Direction to all DJs to ensure speedy disposal of cases wherein statutory time limits were prescribed and penalize the the concerned Presiding Officers when such time limits were exceeded, wherein reasons were not recorded or such recorded reasons are not supported by evidence. Other side/parties may also get opportunity to dispute the petitions filed under 317/256 CrPC with a view to give effect to 309 CrPC. Also seeking strengthening of Section 317 of Criminal Procedure Code 1973 so that it’s blatant misuse at Trial Courts is eradicated.
- Status: Representation Ready to be filed
- Progress: Petition ready to be filed.
- Case law : https://www.shadesofknife.in/state-of-kerala-vs-rasheed-on-30-october-2018/
- File a PIL seeking a direction to all Courts (through HC via Registrar and State of AP) to demand a Declaration in the Affidavit, from all parties to any litigation filed before said Court.
- Inspiration: Rajnesh Vs Neha (Page 62 of the Judgment)
- Status: Hearing done, Awaiting orders.
- Progress: Here.
- File PIL seeking to make IPC 428, 429 as non-bailable.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Link: https://www.shadesofknife.in/adv-gorkanti-vinod-kumar/
- News: https://www.newindianexpress.com/states/telangana/2017/jun/10/court-asks-telangana-andhra-pradesh-to-amend-laws-to-make-cow-slaughter-a-non-bailable-offence-1614993.html
- File a PIL seeking Police policy on disposal of confiscated Vehicles, parked around Police station premises
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL questioning the legal basis for Bar Council of AP to charge fees for any gaps in academics of a LL.B Graduate during Advocate enrollment process, apart from taking an affidavit to that effect.
- Status: ‘Closed’
- Progress: Here.
- Status: ‘Closed’
- File a PIL seeking strict implementation of A4 paper usage in AP High Court and all sub-ordinate authorities such as Tribunals
- Closure (only for HC): Notification
- Status: ‘Closed’
- End Result: High Court of Andhra Pradesh passed Circular directing usage of A4 size paper (both sides printing) in all District Courts and all Forums such as Tribunals here.
- File PIL seeking direction to all Courts in the State u/Article 226/227 to invoke the time limit of 60 days to dispose of a DV case, prescribed under sec 12(5), whenever an application under sec 23(1) was prayed/sought for. Also in the spirit of Sec 309 CrPC.
- Status: ‘Closed‘; Even though my PIL was dismissed, it triggered a much necessary deadline in subsequent HC Circular to District Judiciary. Happy!!!
- Approach: File RTI to all DJ Court Complexes seeking number of cases closed within 60 working days as prescribed u/s 12(5). If no cases disposed off in 3 years, strike down Sec 12(5) from the Act.
- Progress: here
- De-tour: Since too much thought was going into decide if this matter has to dealt as a WP or a WP(PIL), I decided to do BOTH. First a WP, for my individual case and then a WP(PIL) for public benefit.
- File PIL to apply the ratio decidendi of the two High Court judgments available here (Supreme Court also prescribed this Delhi High Court judgment in a judgment here) and here, such that in all matrimonial litigation, both parties shall be required to submit a detailed affidavit with respect to their assets, incomes and expenditures, so that decision on maintenance can be arrived at without delays.
- Status: ‘Closed’
- End Result: Supreme Court passed orders in Rajnesh Vs Neha here.
- File PIL to link Hindu Marriage Act (and other matrimonial laws that have dowry or similar concept) with Dowry Prohibition Act. Get Sec 7 of DP Act Struck down in PIL-2
- Status: Filed, yet to be numbered by AP High Court. Petition summary along with prayers available here.
- Update: Since PIP permission was denied, withdrew the petition.
- Update2: Need to work on attempt-2
- Status: Filed, yet to be numbered by AP High Court. Petition summary along with prayers available here.
- File PIL seeking direction to all Courts in the State u/Article 226/227 to provide free copies to BOTH PARTIES to the application when a DV case is disposed, as prescribed under sec 24.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Approach: File RTI to all DJ Court Complexes seeking number of cases where certified copies are provided to BOTH PARTIES to the application, when a DV case is disposed.
- Progress:
- File PIL seeking direction to all Courts in the State u/Article 226/227 to invoke the time limit of 60 days to dispose of a HMA 24 case, prescribed under the proviso of sec 24, whenever an application for maintenance pendente lite was filed and was prayed/sought for. Also in the spirit of Sec 309 CrPC.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Approach: File RTI to all DJ Court Complexes seeking number of HMA-24 cases closed within 60 working days as prescribed under the proviso of section 24. If no cases disposed off in 3 years, strike down proviso of Sec 24 from the Act.
- Progress:
- File PIL seeking direction to Parliament to empower all Principal District and Session Judge courts to exercise within the local limits of its jurisdiction all or any of the Writs exercisable by the Supreme Court, as prescribed under Article 32(3) of the Constitution (Writ Jurisdiction to District Courts).
- File PIL seeking action against newspapers under Consumer Protection Act for fake/misleading news.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking action/fines against zebra crossing violations
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking amendment to 126, 205, 234, 265C, 273, 278, 279 , 309, 353, 382, 384, 385, 386, 391 CrPC to allow non-pleader or co-accused in the spirit of Rule 37 of Criminal Rules of Practice in AP and Sec 32 of Advocates Act 1961.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking implementation of Article 130 of Constitution of India.
- 130. Seat of Supreme Court.—The Supreme Court shall sit in Delhi or in such other place or places, as the Chief Justice of India may, with the approval of the President, from time to time, appoint.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking action for incorrect data being reported in NCRB Crime in India annual reports.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking reducing noise pollution/ specifically Vehicular Sound pollution.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking CCTV in trains.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking Clothes donation from US to India/Other Developing Countries.
- Idea from: Padma Priya Jupally
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking action against misuse of LOCs.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Idea: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Look_out_circular#Misuses
- File PIL seeking Ban on use of loudspeakers for religious recitation/call to prayer. Many High Courts had already ruled that such calls for prayer, over loudspeakers disturbs the sleep of others.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Link: https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/plea-allahabad-high-court-ban-sound-amplifying-devices-call-to-prayer
- Crazy Idea: Setup auto-translators at various places which will automatically translate the Urdu recitals into local languages for every one to understand what is being recited!
- File PIL seeking Promissory Estoppel applicability to all Parties on their commitments made in their Manifestos.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Idea: https://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/administrative-law/scope-of-promissory-estoppel-against-law-essays.php
- Idea: https://eci.gov.in/files/file/14439-strengthening-of-model-code-of-conduct-for-guidance-of-political-parties-and-candidates-2015-on-promises-made-in-election-manifestos-%E2%80%93-introduction-of-standardized-disclosure-proforma-%E2%80%93-consultation-with-political-parties/
- File PIL seeking amendments to sec 43 of CrPC as the current wording leads to ambiguity and unwarranted consequences to a private person who arrests a person who is charged with an offence.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking amendments to sec 46(3) of CrPC as the current wording leads to unwarranted consequences to a person accused of an offence punishable with death or with imprisonment for life.
- Law: Nothing in this section gives a right to cause the death of a person who is not accused of an offence punishable with death or with imprisonment for life.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking amendments to Protection of Human Rights Act 1993, as suggested in Abdul Sathar Vs Principal Secretary Home Depart and Ors on 05 Feb 2021 along with application of Victims Compensation Scheme 2018.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking striking down of Sec 26 of PWDV Act. It is held by the Apex Court in no uncertain terms that relief under one statute cannot be claimed in proceedings under another statute.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Link: Chand Dhawan v. Jawaharlal Dhawan (1993) 3 SCC 406.
- File PIL seeking amendments to sec 39 of CrPC as it does not provide any protection from false cases.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking to know are we paying cable/satellite channels for Advertisements or content.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking States to repeal of all identified enactments by Law Commission of India or any Committee formed for this purpose, such as R.Ramanujam committee.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking direction to Central and State Governments to Cancel SC/ST certificates if converted to non-Hindu Religions.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking what is the mandate of Women’s Commissions both at Central and State-level (NCW says in a RTI reply, ‘Mother-in-law is not within our Mandate’).
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking direction to eradicate and to take action against Fake Universities issuing false D.Litt Certificates.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Link: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/kerala/spend-a-few-bucks-get-a-dlitt/article27256016.ece
- Link: https://www.edexlive.com/news/2019/jun/21/sfi-writes-to-mhrd-and-pulls-the-plug-on-fake-universities-offering-dlitt-degrees-to-vips-full-list-6709.html
- Link: https://www.deccanchronicle.com/nation/current-affairs/310819/alappuzha-crackdown-on-fake-degree-providers.html
- Link: https://www.dnaindia.com/india/report-concerned-about-growth-of-fake-degree-holders-in-india-students-union-sfi-urges-hrd-ministry-to-take-action-2763772
- File PIL seeking (until directions in Prakash Singh and other judgments are 100% complied by Police) permission/allowance of audio-video recording of complaint filing activity in a Police Station, similar to the facility under Provisos in 161, 164, 275 CrPC and a copy of the video recorded by the complainant/victim will be shared with Police. Basically, empower the complainant instead of depending on Police. This is in compliance with 154(1) CrPC, proviso (b) and helps to go to 154(3), in case FIR is not registered in step 1.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking
- Idea: Implementation of Para 29 from Satender Kumar Antil Vs CBI and Anr on 11 Jul 2022.
- Approach: RTI to AP Home Ministry regd Implementation of Para 29.
29.Thus, we deem it appropriate to direct all the State Governments and the Union Territories to facilitate standing orders while taking note of the standing order issued by the Delhi Police i.e., Standing Order No. 109 of 2020, to comply with the mandate of Section 41A. We do feel that this would certainly take care of not only the unwarranted arrests, but also the clogging of bail applications before various Courts as they may not even be required for the offences up to seven years. - Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking reforms in Police Chargesheet templates/formats, incorporating Traceability Matrix method.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- E.g.:
The Bank Transactions Statement issued by XYZ Bank is sufficient evidence to lay charge sheet on A1
The medical certificate issued by the Medical examiner is sufficient evidence to lay Physical assault Charge on A2.
The CCTV footage captured from College CCTV is sufficient evidence to lay Rape attempt charge on A3
The Independent witness statement corroborates with Documentary evidence of A4
- File PIL seeking direction to police/MHA to implement provision under CrPC 160, also in accordance with the below decision given by Supreme Court.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Link: Nandini Satpathy case.
- File a PIL seeking directions to Home Department to implement Bodycam technology for all police personnel in AP, who are into Law and Order duties.
- Idea: https://twitter.com/iamkandula/status/1573656874989211648?t=4Yg8_VKUhQigUhsGQsNnmQ&s=03)
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking Uniformity in Police uniform, prohibition of usage of civil dress while of duty (which is 24×7)
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking amendments/new act to define, regulate and empower policing activities and duties and powers of police personnel. (This is State subject, so State Governments are R1)
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL to establish online facility to file complaint with Police and obtain a copy of FIR automatically (https://www.thebetterindia.com/45845/e-fir-india-complaint-delhi-police-bengaluru-madhya-pradesh-tamil-nadu-karnataka-himachal-pradesh/).
- Status: ‘Closed’
- Tamil Nadu: https://www.tnpolice.gov.in/CCTNSNICSDC/ComplaintRegistrationPage?4
- Himachal Pradesh: https://himachal.nic.in/en-IN/departments.html
- Jharkhand: https://jofs.jhpolice.gov.in/
- Delhi: https://www.delhipolice.nic.in/citizen_services.html
- Madhya Pradesh: https://citizen.mppolice.gov.in/CitizenLogin.aspx?CtznService=8
- Mumbai : https://mumbaipolice.gov.in/OnlineComplaints?ps_id=0
- Haryana: https://www.haryanapoliceonline.gov.in/
- Odisha: https://odishapolice.gov.in/?q=node/8
- Bihar: http://biharpolice.in/OnLineRegisterComplaint.aspx
- Kolkata : http://www.kolkatapolice.gov.in/reportcrime_new.asp
- Update: Section 173(1) of BNSS allows for e-FIR. Section 173(2) of BNSS allows for e-FIR. Section 530 of BNSS allows for entire investigation and trial to be conducted electronically.
- File PIL seeking action by Police and Judiciary in implementing the Provisos in 161, 164, 275 CrPC to record the statement/confession of a complainant/victim/witness in audio-video electronic means as provided in Act 5 of 2009. (recording of witness statements in Videography in all Criminal cases. Traffic Police are already using CCTV cameras as well as Courts have started recording examination of witnesses via Video Conferencing tools. Covid-19 forces virtual courts also)
- Status: ‘Closed’
- Update: Section 530 of BNSS allows for entire investigation and trial to be conducted electronically.
- File PIL seeking action by Governments to combine Old age homes with Orphanages.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking direction to all Courts in AP to follow practice guidelines issued in State of Kerala Vs Rasheed on 30 October 2018.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking action by Governments to expedite proceedings on Corruption allegations, take steps to finish proceedings before tainted officer expire, also make procedure ensuring continued proceedings to recover losses from the estate of the tainted officer.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking investigation into Preferential Promotions to Govt Employees just before they retire from service.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Info: Check email Dt: May 1, 2020, 5:35 PM; Subject: Preferential Promotions || Please look into my suspicion || Reg.
- File PIL seeking removal of descriptive type of answering in all professional examinations incl Law studies. Or alternatively, conduct such exams, only under the continued observation of CCTV monitoring.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Data: Attach all mass copying incidents in the State.
- File PIL to amend all provisions of IPC as well as all laws of India, that say pay litigation fees to opposite party, since such hapless party is supposed to engage Legal Aid counsel (via National/State/District Legal Authority Services) and not become leech on other party.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking collection of evidence as mandatory criteria to file Charge sheet in certain case types like Matrimonial cases.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking removal of caste name from all the names of Indians.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking Phase-out of DD system in all Govt services like Railways, Banks, Universities
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking usage of ruled-lines booklets in all Examinations in India where descriptive-type answers are expected to be written
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking Disclosure of all items in Bank Lockers by categories like Registered Documents, Precious metals, Others after withholding the specific details such as market value (since secrecy in any transactions with government breeds corruption and fraud)
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL to struck down 498 IPC (since it is on similar lines to 497 IPC, that got struck down on a weird logic of gender-equality)
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL to Demand usage of digital transactions in all Government Depts (including Judiciary) and they must accept payments via only BHIM app/platform, since it is one of the biggest player involving money transactions with Public
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Update: Judiciary came up with https://pay.ecourts.gov.in/epay/
- File PIL to demand disclosure of all relevant information of all departments of the State Government of A.P. as prescribed under Sec 4 (Obligations of public authorities) of Right to Information Act 2005.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL to demand ‘Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions’ to accept of RTI fees through netbanking, credit card or UPI, for all RTI applications filed under Right to Information Act 2005.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking action by Governments to amend existing laws so that exception/not obstante clauses do not override the rule in any Article of Constitution. E.g.: Provisions made under Article 15(3) should not violate provisions made under Article 15(1) or to the disadvantage of other classes of citizens, Section 8 provision of RTI Act should not be in derogation of provision under section 3.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL questioning the real purpose of AIBE exams.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Link: https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/all-india-bar-examination-aibe-supreme-court-168515
- Link: https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/aibe-rules-challenge-bci-powers-supreme-court
- Link: https://www.indialegallive.com/constitutional-law-news/supreme-court-news/supreme-court-all-india-bar-examination-bar-council-of-india/
- Running Case at Supreme Court`: Diary No.- 67 – 2021, PARTHSARTHI MAHESH SARAF vs. UNION OF INDIA
- Update: here.
- File PIL questioning the minimum qualifying marks criteria from LL.B. to qualify for LL.M Entrance examination.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL for Implementation of Compulsory Marriage Registration in India https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1037437/ (Nevertheless, the Supreme Court in the case of Seema (Smt.) v. Ashwani Kumar, [(2006) 2 SCC 578] directed the States and Central Government to notify Rules making registration of marriages compulsory. However, the same has not been implemented in full.)
- File a PIL to Fasten court proceedings, not to entertain adjournments on vague reasons under the philosophy available u/s 309(2) CrPC
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL to raise fines in IPC up to minimum 10 times and impose a minimum of Rs.10,000/- for costs imposed by magistrates and judges. Compare cost of living in India during/around 1973 with the costs/fine mentioned in CrPC/IPC/Other laws and proportional increased must be implemented. Or follow Finland method. Details here, here and here. News here and here.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL to raise Costs in CPC up to minimum 10/100 times.
- Link: https://www.barandbench.com/columns/delhi-high-court-jurisdiction-cpc-costs-rs-20-lakh-juhi-chawla
- File PIL to make fines in all IPC offences as mandatory. Current logic is, where a crime for which imprisonment is punishment be replaced with a fine and the accused let go. The principle should be, Imprisonment or Imprisonment + Fine. Not Imprisonment or fine.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL for mandatory self-protection and self-defense trainings for students of all levels of schools
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL to eradicate food wastage at all Hotels, Religious places, Function Halls and make laws to make it a crime to Waste food.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL for mandatory proactive actions for road safety.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking direction to governments to implement automatic open-shut doors which operate based on token which is paid as Platform ticket.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL for mandatory proactive actions for Station safety. akin to Malaysia and Singapore Underground Metro stations. Also, ensure Fencing of railway tracks in vulnerable areas (where animals generally cross the tracks and accidentally get hit by trains and get injured or die subsequently), by involving Public-Private Partnership model, which creates move employment opportunities.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- News: https://zeenews.india.com/india/woman-found-dead-on-delhi-metro-track-blue-line-services-disrupted-2231458.html
- News: https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/delhi-metro-blue-line-services-disrupted-jhandewalan-woman-suicide-1594339-2019-09-02
- Idea: http://www.kuala-lumpur.ws/transportation/kl-mrt-sbk-line/mrt-pasar-seni.htm
- Idea: https://www.metro-report.com/news/single-view/view/complete-klang-valley-sbk-line-opens.html
- Idea: https://www.123rf.com/photo_117051821_kuala-lumpur-malaysia–october-25-2018–malaysia-mass-rapid-transit-mrt-train-at-bandar-utama-statio.html
- Idea: https://www.nst.com.my/news/nation/2017/07/257459/mrt-underground-stations-not-easy-task-we-did-it
- Idea: https://www.goodmorningparis.fr/metro-bus/metro-station-of-the-month-liege-line-13/
- Idea: https://depositphotos.com/161425442/stock-photo-latest-mrt-mass-rapid-transit.html
- Idea: https://www.bigkl.com/mrt/taman-suntex-mrt-station/attachment/mrt-taman-suntex-station-2017-01/
- Idea: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bartley_MRT_station
- Idea: https://www.123rf.com/photo_82849847_kuala-lumpur-malaysia-july-25-2017-latest-mrt-mass-rapid-transit-kajang-platform-mrt-is-the-latest-p.html
- Idea: https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/translink-skytrain-station-platform-screen-doors-feasibility
- Idea: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KLCC_LRT_station
- File PIL for setting up of Men’s Commission. Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL for mandatory proactive steps for Men’s health.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL for mandatory proactive steps for reducing/eradicating Prevention of suicides of Men.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL for mandatory proactive steps for Men’s health.
- File PIL for mandatory proactive steps for Referendums on policies and work of government. People who voted politicians into power should have power to remove them from power too and such changes should be done to Constitution, as necessary. NOTA should be made more effective.
-
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL for mandatory proactive actions for reforms in politics, right from Manifesto stage. E.g. Manifesto should mention which scheme/benefit will be enacted, in which year of their potential 5 years term. This should demonstrate their power of planning and gives clarity to people in assessing the candidates potential.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Update: here.
-
- File PIL to bring uniformity in Court procedures across Same level of court, Same set of Rules and procedures. All Forms/templates to be freely available online for download, on the respective State High Court website, in both English and the local language.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking struck down of Section 8 – Gender of Indian Penal Code 1860 and replace all references to he, him, himself, his with person.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking struck down of Provisions of Advocates Act 1961 and BCI Rules against advertising their services, as violative of Art 14 as no such prohibition is made on other noble professions like Engineering and Medicine Practitioners.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking display of fuel price in all fuel stations in India, with a break up of Central tax and State taxes clearly mentioned on the rate cards.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Input: https://www.moneylife.in/article/on-writing-a-letter-to-the-authorities-for-inspection-of-files-under-section-4-of-the-rti-act/14783.html
- File PIL seeking removal of all religious places situated on government/public roads affecting transportation.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking establishment of contractor name on all government constructions /public roads. This will ensure accountability. Public should be able to question the contractor and the government (via vicarious liability).
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh to take a call on whether enrollment process should be completely online or not.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL (after representation to Executive) seeking reduction in Telephone Allowance given to all Government Servants including MPs and MLAs, when there are unlimited calls and data plans from both Govt and Private Telecom Operators that general public is using. Better still to dispense with this allowance and grant reimbursement on actuals, like rest of the workers in both private and public sector get.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking strict implementation of filing Counter within 120 days in all Writ Petitions at AP HC, as per Rule 12 of Writ Proceeding Rules 1977
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking steps taken by Municipalities and Corporations to secure dangerous equipment, electric poles, transformers on the roads, and other public places such as Railways, Parks, Government Offices etc. Use rubber sheaths to cover electrical wires. (Japan/Osaka – Raji Reddy video)
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking direction to State to ban packaged drinking water.
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File PIL seeking action from all Universities to allow writing exams in Telugu too in Telugu States of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking singular pension for politicians (MLAs/MPs) who become MLA/MP after becoming MP/MLA
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking amendment to Representation of People Act to allow one person to contest from only one seat.
- Inspiration: https://www.indiatvnews.com/news/india/ban-people-from-contesting-election-from-more-than-one-seat-ec-to-govt-updates-2022-06-17-785275
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking “an order passed which states that the newspapers and news channels need to publish necessary evidence for the news that they publish. Only hearsay news shouldn’t be published. This creates panic among the public. Be it the covid cases numbers, etc. Just for TRP, these news channels go to any extent”
- Idea from: Suprajaa Rajan
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking implementation of Article 348(2) for the State of AP so that Advocates and Litigants can use Telugu, in addition to English, in proceedings in the High Court having its principal seat in that State.
- Idea from: Sake Roja
- Info: https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/vijayawada/use-of-telugu-hc-issues-notice-to-govt/articleshow/88481030.cms
- Info: https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/andhra-pradesh/legal-fraternity-advised-to-use-telugu-in-courts/article4492274.ece
- Info: https://www.deccanherald.com/state/kannada-in-hc-centre-takes-shelter-under-old-mistake-762377.html
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking release of passports of accused persons surrendered in criminal cases at Trial Court, after 1 year of custody.
- Info: https://www.shadesofknife.in/suresh-nanda-vs-c-b-i-on-24-january-2008/
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking removal of Cheques in the Financial system of India
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking action from Railways wrt Platform Improvements with Passenger safety as Priority to avoid such incidents.
- Idea: https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/ap-student-trapped-between-train-and-platform-rescued-after-one-and-a-half-hrs-101670418188937.html
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking….
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking….
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking….
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking….
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking….
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking….
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking….
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking….
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
- File a PIL seeking….
- Status: Ideation/ Ground Work
Procedure to be followed for all above activities
Activities involved in ‘Ideation/ Ground Work‘ Stage:
- Gather necessary data from reliable government sources such as NCRB, Police/CCTNS/Court records via RTI or other legal means
- Gather motivated people and their potential contributions to our causes.
- Gather past work done by others till date, on the issue at hand
Activities involved in ‘Preparing Initial Draft‘ Stage:
- Gather necessary document sample/forms/templates
- Identify large tasks that can be delegated to smaller teams (of 2 or more members, obviously; Max 3 members)
- Shoot formal representations (both offline and online modes) to concerned Government Authorities since it is a per-requisite before filing PILs
Activities involved in ‘Enhancement and Enrichment‘ Stage:
- Get criticism from eminent legal intellectuals, to improve our attack vector
Activities involved in ‘Closed‘ Stage:
Repositories:
- High Court Websites
- Bar Council Websites
- State Police Websites
- State Information Commission Websites
- State Police Academy Websites
- State Judicial Academy Websites
- Anti-sexual harassment policies
- (Offline and Online) Academies for Advocates
- Mooting resources for Law students
MASTER SITEMAP here.
Various rights covered under Article 21 (Protection of life and personal liberty) of Constitution of India
Over the years and decades, Article 21 of the Constitution of India has been expanded a lot, to cover various rights of individuals with changing times and needs of society. Listed below are some.
Article 21 provides, “No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.“
A screen-capture from a training session on the Unacademy platform, lists several rights available under Article 21.
During 1950-1955
- A.K. Gopalan Vs The State Of Madras, Union Of India on 19 May, 1950: Detention under the doctrine of “procedure established by law” is valid detention. (Overruled)
- M.P. Sharma And Ors. Vs Satish Chandra, District Magistrate, Delhi on 15 March, 1954: Right to Privacy. (Overruled)
During 1956-1960
During 1961-1965
- Kharak Singh Vs The State Of U.P. & Others on 18 December, 1962: Right to privacy. (Overruled)
-
The State Of Uttar Pradesh vs Mohammad Naim on 15 March, 1963: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1498181/
- State Of Maharashtra vs Prabhakar Pandurang & Another on 6 September, 1965: Right to Write a Book
During 1966-1970
- Satwant Singh Sawhney Vs Assistant Passport Officer, New Delhi on 10 April, 1967: Right to travel abroad
- Rustom Cavasjee Cooper vs Union Of India on 10 February, 1970: Fundamental Rights are not silos but they are inter-connected. Nationalization Case. Right to compensation. (Overruled A.K. Gopalan V State of Madras)
During 1971-1975
- Kesavananda Bharati Sripadagalvaru and Ors Vs State Of Kerala And Anr on 24 April, 1973: Doctrine of Basic Structure of Constitution of India. (Overruled A.K. Gopalan V State of Madras)
- Govind Vs State Of Madhya Pradesh & Anr on 18 March, 1975: Right to Privacy. (Overruled)
During 1976-1980
- Additional District Magistrate, Jabalpur Vs S. S. Shukla Etc. Etc on 28 April, 1976: Right to Move Courts For Remedies (Overruled).
- Hussainara Khatoon v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar 1979: Right to Speedy Trial, Legal Aid
- Maneka Gandhi Vs Union Of India on 25 January, 1978: Right to have fair, just and reasonable procedure
- Babu Singh And Ors vs The State Of U.P on 31 January, 1978: Right to Bail
- Madhav Hayawadanrao Hoskot Vs State Of Maharashtra on 17 August, 1978: Right to Legal Aid, Right to Appeal
- Sunil Batra Etc Vs Delhi Administration And Ors. Etc on 30 August, 1978: Right against Solitary Confinement
- Charles Sobhraj Vs Superintendent, Tihar Jail on 31 August, 1978: Right against Bar Fetters
- Sunil Batra Vs Delhi Administration on 20 December, 1979: Right of Prisoner to Free Legal Aid
- Prem Shankar Shukla vs Delhi Administration on 29 April, 1980: Right against hand cuffing
- Khatri and Others Vs State of Bihar and Ors on 19 December, 1980 : right to free legal services is inalienable from Article 21
During 1981-1985
- Francis Coralie Mullin Vs The Administrator, Union Territory of Delhi on 13 January, 1981: Right To Live with Human Dignity, Interviewed by Advocate and family members
- Khatri and Ors Vs State of Bihar and Ors on 10 March, 1981: statement made before a police officer in the course of an investigation not to be signed
- People’s Union For Democratic Rights & Others vs Union Of India & Others on 18 September, 1982: Right to Minimum Wages
-
Board Of Trustees Of The Port Of … vs Dilipkumar Raghavendranath … on 17 November, 1982: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1787020/
- T.V.Vatheeswaran Vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 16 February, 1983: Right against Delayed Execution; Delay in executing death sentence is inherently violative of Dignity of Life (Overruled)
- Sher Singh & Others vs The State Of Punjab on 24 March, 1983: Right against Delayed Execution; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1166797/ (Overruled T.V.Vatheeswaran)
- Mithu Vs State Of Punjab on 7 April, 1983: Struck down of 303 IPC
- State Of Maharashtra Vs Chandrabhan Tale on 7 July, 1983: Sustenance allowance even after conviction pending appeal; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1184378/
- Rudul Sah vs State Of Bihar And Another on 1 August, 1983: Right to receive compensation; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/810491/
-
Deena @ Deena Dayal Etc. Etc vs Union Of India And Others on 23 September, 1983: Death by Hanging not Violative of Article 21; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/888451/
-
Bandhua Mukti Morcha Vs Union of India and Ors on 16 Dec 1983: (Right to Dignity of Live)
-
Rural Litigation And Entitlement … vs State Of U.P. & Ors on 12 March, 1985: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1949293/
- Olga Tellis & Ors vs Bombay Municipal Corporation & … on 10 July, 1985: Right to Work; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/709776/
- Attorney General of India v. Lachma Devi: Right against Public Hanging; http://www.the-laws.com/Encyclopedia/Browse/Case?CaseId=005891763000
During 1986-1990
- M.C. Mehta And Anr vs Union Of India & Ors on 20 December, 1986: Right to have clean Environment; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1486949/
-
T. Damodhar Rao And Ors. vs The Special Officer, Municipal … on 20 January, 1987: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/205063/
- Sheela Barse Vs State Of Maharashtra on 18 September, 1987: Right of prisoners to be Interviewed/ right against custodial violence
-
Reliance Petrochemicals Ltd vs Proprietors Of Indian Express Newspapers on 23 September, 1988: Right to know; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1351834/
- Kiran Bedi & Ors vs Committee Of Inquiry & Anr on 4 January, 1989: Right to Reputation
- Pt. Parmanand Katara vs Union Of India & Ors on 28 August, 1989: Right to Medical Care
- M/S. Shantistar Builders vs Narayan Khimalal Totame And Others on 31 January, 1990: Right to Shelter.
- Shantistar Builders Vs Narayan Khimalal Gotame & Ors. Etc on 17 November, 1995
- Further elaborated in ‘Chameli Singh’ case.
- Delhi Transport Corporation vs D.T.C. Mazdoor Congress on 4 September, 1990: Right To Livelihood; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/268805/
During 1991-1995
- Subhash Kumar vs State Of Bihar And Ors on 9 January, 1991: Right to get Pollution Free Water and Air; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1646284/
- Abdul Rehman Antulay and Ors Vs R.S. Nayak and Anr on 10 Dec 1991: Right to Speedy Trial, Reiterated Hussainara Khatoon in 1979
- Miss Mohini Jain vs State Of Karnataka And Ors on 30 July, 1992: Right to Education; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/40715/
- Unni Krishnan, J.P. And Ors. Etc. … vs State Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors. … on 4 February, 1993: Right to receive education upto the primary stage, Multiple rights https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1775396/
-
D.K. Yadav vs J.M.A. Industries Ltd on 7 May, 1993: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/427114/
- Joginder Kumar vs State Of U.P on 25 April, 1994: Right against Illegal Detention; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/768175/
-
P. Rathinam/Nagbhusan Patnaik vs Union Of India And Another on 26 April, 1994: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/66070774/
-
Delhi Domestic Working Women’s Forum Vs Union Of India And Others on 19 October, 1994: Compensation to Rape victims https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1765970/
- Consumer Education and Research Centre & Others Vs Union of India & Others on 27 January, 1995: Right to Health; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1657323/
-
M.J. Sivani And Ors vs State Of Karnataka And Ors on 17 April, 1995: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/694951/
-
U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad & Anr vs Friends Coop. Housing Society on 24 April, 1995: Right to Shelter; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/967399/
- L.I.C. of India v. Consumer Education and Research Centre on 10 May, 1995: Right to Social Security and Protection of Family; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1513693/
- Chameli Singh vs State Of U.P on 15 December, 1995: Right to Shelter; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/18928039/ (Earlier HC Judgment: https://www.casemine.com/judgement/in/5ac5e29e4a932619d901432f)
-
Shri Bodhisattwa Gautam vs Miss Subhra Chakraborty on 15 December, 1995: Right against Rape; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/642436/
During 1996-2000
- Smt. Gian Kaur vs The State Of Punjab on 21 March, 1996: Euthanasia and Right to Life; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/217501/
-
Vellore Citizens Welfare Forum vs Union Of India & Ors on 28 August, 1996: Right to fresh air, clean water and pollution free environment; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1934103/
- People’S Union Of Civil Liberties … vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Anr. on 18 December, 1996: Tapping of Telephone; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/31276692/
-
Shri D.K. Basu,Ashok K. Johri vs State Of West Bengal,State Of U.P on 18 December, 1996: Rights of arrested persons against torture and illegal detention; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/501198/
-
Mrs. Pragati Varghese And Etc. vs Cyril George Varghese And Etc. on 6 May, 1997: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1401518/
- Vishaka & Ors vs State Of Rajasthan & Ors on 13 August, 1997: Right Against Sexual Harassment at Workplace; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1031794/
-
Chandra Rajakumari And Anr. vs Commissioner Of Police, … on 27 October, 1997: Beauty contests can be obscene; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1317411/
- Vineet Narain & Others Vs Union Of India & Another on 18 December, 1997: Right to Public Trial
- Mr. ‘X’ vs Hospital ‘Z’ on 21 September, 1998: Right to Marriage (Disclosure of Dreadful Diseases); https://indiankanoon.org/doc/382721/
-
Apparel Export Promotion Council vs A.K. Chopra on 20 January, 1999: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/856194/
-
Capt.M. Paul Anthony vs Bharat Gold Mines Ltd. & Anr on 30 March, 1999: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/888207/
-
The Chairman, Railway Board & Ors vs Mrs. Chandrima Das & Ors on 28 January, 2000: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/113663/
During 2001-2005
- Seeta Hemchandra Shashittal and Anr Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors on 13 Feb 2001: Right of Speedy Trial
- Murli S. Deora vs Union Of India And Ors on 2 November, 2001: Smoking in public place; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1495522/
- PUCL v UOI on Nov 30 2001: Right to Food; https://www.escr-net.org/caselaw/2006/peoples-union-civil-liberties-v-union-india-ors-supreme-court-india-civil-original
-
People’s Union of Civil Liberties (P.U.C.L.) & Anr. Vs Union Of India & Anr on 13 March, 2003: Right to know election contestant information
-
State Of Bihar vs Lal Krishna Advani & Ors on 16 September, 2003: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/211801/
- In Re: Noise Pollution (Forum, Prevention of Envn. and Sound Pollution) on 18 July, 2005: Right Against Noise Pollution; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1709298/
During 2006-2010
- Zahira Habibullah Sheikh & Anr vs State Of Gujarat & Ors on 8 March, 2006: Right to Fair Trial; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1067991/
- Lata Singh Vs State of U.P. and Another on 7 July, 2006: (Right to Marry a person of one’s choice)
- Husband tapping wife conversations https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1058685/
- Swapan Kumar Saha vs South Point Montessory High … on 19 September, 2006, Overloading of bus https://indiankanoon.org/doc/416937/
-
State Of Maharashtra vs Public Concern For Governance … on 4 January, 2007: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/404911/
- Pankaj Kumar Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors on 11 Jul 2008: Right to Speedy Trial
-
Sukhwant Singh & Ors vs State Of Punjab on 18 May, 2009: Right to Reputation; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/1737184/
During 2011-2015
- Amar Singh Vs Union Of India & Ors on 11 May, 2011: Trying to misuse Article 21
- In Re Ramlila Maidan Incident Dt. 4.06.2011 Vs UOI and Ors on 23 February 2012: Right to Sleep
- Kishore Samrite Vs State of U.P. and Ors on 18 October, 2012:
- Manohar Lal Sharma Vs The Principle Secretary & Others on 17 December, 2013: No prior permission required to inquire a public servant.
- Dr.Subramanian Swamy Vs Director, CBI & Anr on 6 May, 2014: Struck down the ‘Single Directive’
- Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) & Anr Vs Union Of India & Ors on 11 August, 2015, 24 August, 2017 and 26 September, 2018: Right to Privacy (Aadhaar Card case)
During 2016-2020
- Refusal to grant bail without recording reasons : https://indiankanoon.org/doc/16902738/
-
detained in custody by adopting totally faulty and illegal process :
- Subramanian Swamy Vs Union of India on 13 May, 2016: Right to Reputation
-
Common Cause (A Regd. Society) vs Union Of India on 9 March, 2018: Right to die with dignity; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/184449972/
-
Shakti Vahini vs Union Of India on 27 March, 2018: Righ to choose life partner; https://indiankanoon.org/doc/92846055/
- Navtej Singh Johar Vs Union of India on 6 September, 2018: Right to choose sexual partner
- Swapnil Tripathi Vs Supreme Court of India on 26 September, 2018: Right to access to legal proceedings
- Reena Hazarika Vs State of Assam on 31 Oct 2018: Right to submit defence viewpoint by way of proceedings u/s 313 CrPC
- Afzal Ansari and 2 Ors Vs State Of U.P. and 2 Ors on 15 May 2020: (Allahabad High Court: Right of protection from sound pollution; Right to sleep)
- Vineet Ruia Vs Govt of West Bengal & Ors: (Right to decent burial)
- Arun Sharma Vs State of M.P. on 02 Nov 2020: (Madhya Pradesh High Court: Parading suspects to media/public is violative of Article 21-Right to decency/Dignity/Privacy)
- Subhranshu Rout @ Gugul Vs State of Odisha on 23 Nov 2020: [OrissaHC: Right to be forgotten; Videos/Photos of a Rape survivor on Facebook servers]
During 2021-2025
- The National Highway Projects in the State of Bihar Vs State of Bihar on 10 May 2022 [PHC: Construct Retail stores with convenience facilities (toilets) on the State and National Highways in the State]
- Vysakh K.G. Vs Union of India and Anr on 22 Dec 2022 [KerHC: Right to be forgotten in certain case types in Kerala]
Dismissed Petitions:
-
D. Bhuvan Mohan Patnaik & Ors vs State Of Andhra Pradesh & Ors on 9 September, 1974: https://indiankanoon.org/doc/353351/ [1974 AIR 2092], [1975 SCR (2) 24]
- Renuka Jain Vs State (NCT of Delhi) and Ors on 06 Jan 2026 [DHC: De facto complainant does not have locus to file a petition seeking Speedy Trial]
- Vijay Kumar and Ors Vs State of Rajasthan on 08 Jan 2026 [SC: Revision Petition was pending disposal for 23 years at Rajasthan High Court]
MAIN Index is here.
