A punishment of censure which is not likely to have any effect on the career of the police officers will not be a sufficient deterrent to the officer. The censure should be of such nature that other officers too must not emulate such actions in future.
Merely because the condition imposed by the Court as per law is causing inconvenience to the petitioner, it can neither become a ground for deletion of the condition nor it can be said that the same amounts to violation of her fundamental right to travel abroad.
“Article 21 of the Constitution gives Protection of Life and Personal Liberty to all persons whereby it is the inherent right of every individual to exercise personal choices, especially in matter relating to marriage.”
“Politicians play an influential role in the life of a common man. The words and actions of a politician has an impact on his followers, party men and public at large. It is imperative that this power is not to be misused for illegal and personal gains”
The larger public interest, which concerns patient safety, requires that all medical devices be brought within a regulatory regime. One cannot quibble with the intent, purpose and object with which the impugned notifications have been issued.
The applicant behind bars will be violative of Article 21 as the status of the applicant is merely that of a suspect till the outcome of the proceedings emanating therefrom as the applicant is innocent till proven guilty.
Denying a woman employee her basic human right to maternity leave would be an assault on her dignity as an individual and thereby offend her fundamental right to life guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.
HIV/AIDS patients have a right of equal treatment everywhere and they cannot be denied job opportunity or discriminated against in employment matters.
P&H High Court clarified that the matter was not adjudicated on merits and the instant order was not a blanket bail in any FIR.
The Supreme Court said that it cannot adopt a doctrinaire approach. Some sacrifices have to be always made for the greater good, and unless such sacrifices are prima facie apparent and ex facie harsh and unequitable as to classify as manifestly arbitrary, these would not be interfered with by the court. Thus, no priority can be given to workers’ dues after liquidation of the company under the IBC.
A person who is residing in South India does not know the geography of Delhi and if recruited as civil defence volunteer, and in case of emergency he will get lost in Delhi instead of reaching to the place where emergency has occurred
“Person who does not do equity with others and even to the life companion, cannot approach the Court to seek approval of his relation under the umbrella of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.”
Even if a single individual may be benefitted from the construction of revenue ‘rasta’ at the instance of the Revenue Collector, it is not sufficient and well-informed reason for the Panchayat to resist compliance with orders of the Collector.
“The prime concern and endeavour of law should be to secure justice on the basis of truth, which ought to be unearthed through a committed and competent investigating agency.” observes the Court.
The Gujarat HC has observed that right to freedom of trade may be a fundamental right, but not a carte blanche. The right to free trade in food items like meat, or any such food has to be sub-serving to public health and food safety requirements.
Madras High Court held that the right of privacy and reputation of the petitioner have been sullied by the act of the police officials for which the State is certainly responsible.
The Tribunal observed that the act of filling in 2 applications for one and the same post in more than one Unit cannot be accepted to be an inadvertent or innocent act.
Imposing a prohibitory ban on merchant establishments and establishments that provide livelihood is contrary to the enshrined principles under Article 21.
The rights of a child to education have to be balanced with the rights of the school under the DSER, 1973. If the petitioner is unable to pay the fees of the school, the petitioner certainly does not have a right to continue education in the school in question. However, the petitioner cannot be tormented in this manner in the middle of the academic session.
Unfounded criminal charges and long drawn criminal prosecution can have serious consequences. A person subjected to such litigation suffers immense mental trauma, humiliation and monetary loss.