⚖
Loading…
Loading…
Indian case law by case name, citation, provision or legal issue, with the case summary, the judgment text where we hold it and the provisions it applies.
1–20 · Page 1 of 5
Supreme Court of India17 Jan 2019Full text
2019 INSC 52 · [2019] 1 S.C.R. 371
Immediately after the decision in Maneka Gandhi [Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 1 SCC 248] another Constitution Bench of this Court rendered decision in Sunil Batra v. State (UT of Delhi) [Sunil Batra v. State … Union of India, (1970) 1 SCC 248] and Maneka
Indian case law by case name, citation, provision or legal issue, with the case summary, the judgment text where we hold it and the provisions it applies.
1–20 · Page 1 of 5
Supreme Court of India17 Jan 2019Full text
2019 INSC 52 · [2019] 1 S.C.R. 371
Immediately after the decision in Maneka Gandhi [Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 1 SCC 248] another Constitution Bench of this Court rendered decision in Sunil Batra v. State (UT of Delhi) [Sunil Batra v. State … Union of India, (1970) 1 SCC 248] and Maneka
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of Indiaundefined undefined NaNFull textCited by 1
(2017) 9 SCC 1
Bank Nationalisation case [Rustom Cavasjee Cooper (Banks 369 Nationalisation) v. Union of India, (1970) 1 SCC 248] and Maneka Gandhi case [Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 2 SCR 621: (1978) 1 SCC 248] .… In Bachan Singh … the majority, said that if Article 21 is understood in accordance with the interpretation put upon it in Maneka Gandhi [Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 2 SCR 621 : (1978) 1 SCC 248], it will read
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of Indiaundefined undefined NaNFull textCited by 1
(2017) 10 SCC 1
Constitution; the same consequence ensued after the decisions in the Bank Nationalisation case ( 1970) 1 SCC 248, and Maneka Gandhi case (1978) 1 SCC 248.… In Bachan Singh ( Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab , (1980) 2 SCC … the majority, said that if Article 21 is understood in accordance with the interpretation put upon it in Maneka Gandhi, it will read to say that: (SCC p.730, para 136) “136. No person shall be deprived of his
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India18 Aug 2011Full text
2011 INSC 590 · [2011] 12 S.C.R. 191
But the said interpretation does no longer hold good after the epoch making decision of this Court in Maneka Gandhi (supra), where this Court held the law does not mean any enacted piece. According to the majority decision … Maneka Gandhi (supra) "law is reasonable law not any enacted piece" B (para 85 page 338 of the report) 30. In Maneka Gandhi (supra) this Court held that the expression 'procedure established by law' in Article 21 means
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India26 Sep 2018Full text
2018 INSC 880 · [2018] 8 S.C.R. 1
liable to be tested. Under Article 21, the standard test at present is the rationality review expressed in Maneka Gandhi case [Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 1 F SCC 248] . This requires that any procedure … State interferes with an Article 21 right to be “fair, just and reasonable, not fanciful, oppressive or arbitrary” [Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 1 SCC 248 at p. 323, para 48]. R.F. Nariman
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India9 Aug 2011Full text
2011 INSC 554 · [2011] 13 S.C.R. 636
amputation of his personal liberty. Therefore, land reform law, if unreasonable, violates Article 21 as expansively construed in Maneka Gandhi. The dichotomy between personal liberty, in Article 21, and proprietary status, in Articles 31 and 19 is plain … the absence of mention of Article 21 in Article 31-A and the illusory hope of inflating Maneka Gandhi to impart a healing touch to those whose property is taken by feigning loss of personal liberty when the
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India2 Sep 2014Full text
2014 INSC 590 · [2014] 11 S.C.R. 1009
Close on the heels of Maneka Gandhi's case came Mithu vs. State of Punjab, (1983) 2 SCC 277, in which case the Court noted as follows: H 1030 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014) 11 S.C.R. • A "In Sunil … the same consequence ensued after the decisions in the Bank Nationalisation's case (1970) 1 sec 248 and Maneka Gandhi's case (1978) 1 sec 248 .... c In Bachan Singh which upheld the constitutional validity ol · the death
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India28 Sep 2011Full text
2011 INSC 722 · [2011] 15 S.C.R. 92
Maharashtra and another (AIR 1967 SC 1), Rustom Cavasjee Cooper v. Union of India [(1970) 1 SCC 248), Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and another [(1978) 1 sec 248) and several other decisions. H 122 SUPREME COURT … held that in the evolving mosaic of our Constitutional Jurisprudence, specially after the decision of this Court in Maneka Gandhi (supra), Article 21 of the Constitution which guarantees life and B personal liberty has to be interpreted differently
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India23 Nov 2017Full text
2017 INSC 1137 · [2017] 12 S.C.R. 358
Imnlediately after the decision in Maneka Gandhi ((1978) I SCC 248] another Constitution Bench of this Court rendered decision in Sunil Batra v. Delhi Admn. ((1978) 4 SCC 494: 1979 SCC (Cri) 155) specifically acknowl~dged that even … Constitution text, but after the decision of this Court in Rustom Cavasjee Cooper [(1970) 1 SCC 248] and Maneka Gandhi [(1978) 1 SCC 248] the consequences are the same. The Constitution Bench of this Court in Sunil Batra
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India11 Dec 2013Full text
2013 INSC 823 · [2013] 17 S.C.R. 116
Gopalan v. State of Madras 1950 SCR 88, R.C. Cooper v. Union of India (1970) 1 SCC 248, Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248 and submitted that Gopalan's case has not been overruled … Maneka Gandhi's case. 16.9 That the term used in Section 375 IPC, which defines rape is 'sexual intercourse', whereas in Section 377 IPC the expression is 'carnal intercourse'. In Khanu v. Emperor AIR C 1925 (Sind
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India16 Jul 2013Full text
2013 INSC 470 · [2013] 7 S.C.R. 654
reference to the D observations made by this Court in Rustom Cavasjee Cooper Vs. Union of lndia35 and Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India & Anr., 36 he emphasised that the direct operation of the Act upon the rights … the doctrine of intended and real effect or the E direct and inevitable effect, in the case of Maneka Gandhi (supra). Dr. Dhawan also emphasised that dancing is covered by Article 19(1)(a) even though it has
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India4 Jul 2018Full text
2019 INSC 194 · [2018] 7 S.C.R. 1
jurisprudence in the Indian context has undergone a sea change after the decisions in R.C. Cooper v. U.O.I6and Maneka Gandhi v. U.O.I7. Learned counsel for the appellant submit that this Court should adopt a more purposive and … and others8 wherein the majority observed that the decisions of this Court prior to R.C. Cooper (supra) and Maneka Gandhi (supra) must be understood in their historical context
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India20 Mar 2018Full text
2018 INSC 248 · [2018] 4 S.C.R. 877
decision in Rajesh Kumar versus State30 as follows: “62. Until the decision was rendered in Maneka Gandhi (supra), Article 21 was viewed by this Court as rarely embodying the Diceyian concept of rule of law that no one … Rochester ‘be boiled in oil’ it would be valid under Article 21. But after the decision in Maneka Gandhi (supra) which marks a watershed in the development of constitutional law in our country, this Court, for the first
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India27 Feb 2012Full text
2012 INSC 108 · [2012] 1 S.C.R. 1066
have not considered the impact of Article 21 on Section 154 of Cr.P.C. G After and beginning with Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and Another 1978 (1) SCC 248, this Court has applied Article 21 to several … can be said to be implicit within the provisions of Section 154 of Cr.P.C. Reliance was placed on Maneka Gandhi (supra) and S.M.D. Kiran Pasha v. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others 1990 (1) SCC
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of Indiaundefined undefined NaNFull textCited by 1
(2010) 7 SCC 263
should be construed with due regard for the inter-relationship between rights, since this approach was recognised in Maneka Gandhi's case, (1978) 1 SCC 248. Hence, we must examine the `right against self-incrimination' in respect
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India1 Feb 2012Full text
2012 INSC 66 · [2012] 4 S.C.R. 608
his concurring judgment Justice 0. Chinnappa Reddy held as follows: G "25. Judged in the light shed by Maneka Gandhi and Bachan Singh, it is impossible to uphold Section 303 as valid. Section 303 excludes judicial discretion. The … struck down as unconstitutional." 46. It is now well settled that in view of decision in Maneka C Gandhi vs. Union of India - (1978) 1 SCC 248, Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab - (1980) 2 SCC 684 and
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India14 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 414 · [2015] 7 S.C.R. 853
which require a Mahatma Gandhi to own up Himalayan blunders and unfold unpleasant truths truthfully. c 78. In Maneka Gandhi (supra), this Court observed thus
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India11 Sep 2012Full text
2012 INSC 388 · [2012] 12 S.C.R. 256
SCC 386: 1997 (4) Suppl. SCR 68; Chintaman Rao v. The State of Madhya Pradesh (1950) SCR 759; Maneka Gandhi D v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248: 1978 (2) SCR 621; Brij Bhushan v. State
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India10 Dec 2015Full text
2015 INSC 912 · [2015] 12 S.C.R. 1106
Supp SCC 1; E.P Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu &Another1974 (2) SCR348: (1974) 4 SCC 3; Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India & D Another 1978 (2) SCR 621 : (1978) 1 SCC 248 -referred
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India6 May 2014Full text
2014 INSC 358 · [2014] 6 S.C.R. 873
India and F Ors. (2006) 7 SCC 1: 2006 (5) Suppl. SCR 1; Union of India v. R. Gandhi, President, Madras Bar Association (2010) 11 SCC 1: 2010 (6) SCR 857; K. T. Plantation (P} Ltd. & Anr … Indra Sawhney (2) v. Union of India and Ors. (2000) 1 SCC 168: 1999 (5) Suppl. SCR 229; Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and Anr. (1978) 1 SCC 248: 1978 (2) SCR 621; Ajay Hasia and Ors
Matched in judgment text
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of Indiaundefined undefined NaNFull textCited by 1
(2017) 9 SCC 1
Bank Nationalisation case [Rustom Cavasjee Cooper (Banks 369 Nationalisation) v. Union of India, (1970) 1 SCC 248] and Maneka Gandhi case [Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 2 SCR 621: (1978) 1 SCC 248] .… In Bachan Singh … the majority, said that if Article 21 is understood in accordance with the interpretation put upon it in Maneka Gandhi [Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 2 SCR 621 : (1978) 1 SCC 248], it will read
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of Indiaundefined undefined NaNFull textCited by 1
(2017) 10 SCC 1
Constitution; the same consequence ensued after the decisions in the Bank Nationalisation case ( 1970) 1 SCC 248, and Maneka Gandhi case (1978) 1 SCC 248.… In Bachan Singh ( Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab , (1980) 2 SCC … the majority, said that if Article 21 is understood in accordance with the interpretation put upon it in Maneka Gandhi, it will read to say that: (SCC p.730, para 136) “136. No person shall be deprived of his
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India18 Aug 2011Full text
2011 INSC 590 · [2011] 12 S.C.R. 191
But the said interpretation does no longer hold good after the epoch making decision of this Court in Maneka Gandhi (supra), where this Court held the law does not mean any enacted piece. According to the majority decision … Maneka Gandhi (supra) "law is reasonable law not any enacted piece" B (para 85 page 338 of the report) 30. In Maneka Gandhi (supra) this Court held that the expression 'procedure established by law' in Article 21 means
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India26 Sep 2018Full text
2018 INSC 880 · [2018] 8 S.C.R. 1
liable to be tested. Under Article 21, the standard test at present is the rationality review expressed in Maneka Gandhi case [Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 1 F SCC 248] . This requires that any procedure … State interferes with an Article 21 right to be “fair, just and reasonable, not fanciful, oppressive or arbitrary” [Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 1 SCC 248 at p. 323, para 48]. R.F. Nariman
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India9 Aug 2011Full text
2011 INSC 554 · [2011] 13 S.C.R. 636
amputation of his personal liberty. Therefore, land reform law, if unreasonable, violates Article 21 as expansively construed in Maneka Gandhi. The dichotomy between personal liberty, in Article 21, and proprietary status, in Articles 31 and 19 is plain … the absence of mention of Article 21 in Article 31-A and the illusory hope of inflating Maneka Gandhi to impart a healing touch to those whose property is taken by feigning loss of personal liberty when the
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India2 Sep 2014Full text
2014 INSC 590 · [2014] 11 S.C.R. 1009
Close on the heels of Maneka Gandhi's case came Mithu vs. State of Punjab, (1983) 2 SCC 277, in which case the Court noted as follows: H 1030 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2014) 11 S.C.R. • A "In Sunil … the same consequence ensued after the decisions in the Bank Nationalisation's case (1970) 1 sec 248 and Maneka Gandhi's case (1978) 1 sec 248 .... c In Bachan Singh which upheld the constitutional validity ol · the death
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India28 Sep 2011Full text
2011 INSC 722 · [2011] 15 S.C.R. 92
Maharashtra and another (AIR 1967 SC 1), Rustom Cavasjee Cooper v. Union of India [(1970) 1 SCC 248), Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and another [(1978) 1 sec 248) and several other decisions. H 122 SUPREME COURT … held that in the evolving mosaic of our Constitutional Jurisprudence, specially after the decision of this Court in Maneka Gandhi (supra), Article 21 of the Constitution which guarantees life and B personal liberty has to be interpreted differently
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India23 Nov 2017Full text
2017 INSC 1137 · [2017] 12 S.C.R. 358
Imnlediately after the decision in Maneka Gandhi ((1978) I SCC 248] another Constitution Bench of this Court rendered decision in Sunil Batra v. Delhi Admn. ((1978) 4 SCC 494: 1979 SCC (Cri) 155) specifically acknowl~dged that even … Constitution text, but after the decision of this Court in Rustom Cavasjee Cooper [(1970) 1 SCC 248] and Maneka Gandhi [(1978) 1 SCC 248] the consequences are the same. The Constitution Bench of this Court in Sunil Batra
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India11 Dec 2013Full text
2013 INSC 823 · [2013] 17 S.C.R. 116
Gopalan v. State of Madras 1950 SCR 88, R.C. Cooper v. Union of India (1970) 1 SCC 248, Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248 and submitted that Gopalan's case has not been overruled … Maneka Gandhi's case. 16.9 That the term used in Section 375 IPC, which defines rape is 'sexual intercourse', whereas in Section 377 IPC the expression is 'carnal intercourse'. In Khanu v. Emperor AIR C 1925 (Sind
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India16 Jul 2013Full text
2013 INSC 470 · [2013] 7 S.C.R. 654
reference to the D observations made by this Court in Rustom Cavasjee Cooper Vs. Union of lndia35 and Maneka Gandhi Vs. Union of India & Anr., 36 he emphasised that the direct operation of the Act upon the rights … the doctrine of intended and real effect or the E direct and inevitable effect, in the case of Maneka Gandhi (supra). Dr. Dhawan also emphasised that dancing is covered by Article 19(1)(a) even though it has
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India4 Jul 2018Full text
2019 INSC 194 · [2018] 7 S.C.R. 1
jurisprudence in the Indian context has undergone a sea change after the decisions in R.C. Cooper v. U.O.I6and Maneka Gandhi v. U.O.I7. Learned counsel for the appellant submit that this Court should adopt a more purposive and … and others8 wherein the majority observed that the decisions of this Court prior to R.C. Cooper (supra) and Maneka Gandhi (supra) must be understood in their historical context
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India20 Mar 2018Full text
2018 INSC 248 · [2018] 4 S.C.R. 877
decision in Rajesh Kumar versus State30 as follows: “62. Until the decision was rendered in Maneka Gandhi (supra), Article 21 was viewed by this Court as rarely embodying the Diceyian concept of rule of law that no one … Rochester ‘be boiled in oil’ it would be valid under Article 21. But after the decision in Maneka Gandhi (supra) which marks a watershed in the development of constitutional law in our country, this Court, for the first
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India27 Feb 2012Full text
2012 INSC 108 · [2012] 1 S.C.R. 1066
have not considered the impact of Article 21 on Section 154 of Cr.P.C. G After and beginning with Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and Another 1978 (1) SCC 248, this Court has applied Article 21 to several … can be said to be implicit within the provisions of Section 154 of Cr.P.C. Reliance was placed on Maneka Gandhi (supra) and S.M.D. Kiran Pasha v. Government of Andhra Pradesh and Others 1990 (1) SCC
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of Indiaundefined undefined NaNFull textCited by 1
(2010) 7 SCC 263
should be construed with due regard for the inter-relationship between rights, since this approach was recognised in Maneka Gandhi's case, (1978) 1 SCC 248. Hence, we must examine the `right against self-incrimination' in respect
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India1 Feb 2012Full text
2012 INSC 66 · [2012] 4 S.C.R. 608
his concurring judgment Justice 0. Chinnappa Reddy held as follows: G "25. Judged in the light shed by Maneka Gandhi and Bachan Singh, it is impossible to uphold Section 303 as valid. Section 303 excludes judicial discretion. The … struck down as unconstitutional." 46. It is now well settled that in view of decision in Maneka C Gandhi vs. Union of India - (1978) 1 SCC 248, Bachan Singh Vs. State of Punjab - (1980) 2 SCC 684 and
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India14 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 414 · [2015] 7 S.C.R. 853
which require a Mahatma Gandhi to own up Himalayan blunders and unfold unpleasant truths truthfully. c 78. In Maneka Gandhi (supra), this Court observed thus
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India11 Sep 2012Full text
2012 INSC 388 · [2012] 12 S.C.R. 256
SCC 386: 1997 (4) Suppl. SCR 68; Chintaman Rao v. The State of Madhya Pradesh (1950) SCR 759; Maneka Gandhi D v. Union of India (1978) 1 SCC 248: 1978 (2) SCR 621; Brij Bhushan v. State
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India10 Dec 2015Full text
2015 INSC 912 · [2015] 12 S.C.R. 1106
Supp SCC 1; E.P Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu &Another1974 (2) SCR348: (1974) 4 SCC 3; Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India & D Another 1978 (2) SCR 621 : (1978) 1 SCC 248 -referred
Matched in judgment text
Supreme Court of India6 May 2014Full text
2014 INSC 358 · [2014] 6 S.C.R. 873
India and F Ors. (2006) 7 SCC 1: 2006 (5) Suppl. SCR 1; Union of India v. R. Gandhi, President, Madras Bar Association (2010) 11 SCC 1: 2010 (6) SCR 857; K. T. Plantation (P} Ltd. & Anr … Indra Sawhney (2) v. Union of India and Ors. (2000) 1 SCC 168: 1999 (5) Suppl. SCR 229; Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India and Anr. (1978) 1 SCC 248: 1978 (2) SCR 621; Ajay Hasia and Ors
Matched in judgment text
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis