A Case for Feminist Reasoning in Judicial Edict
by Balram Pandey*
by Balram Pandey*
The 5-judge Constitution Bench observed that the decision which will be rendered by the nine-Judge Bench in the Sabarimala Temple Review will have a direct impact on the questions which arise for determination in this case.
Kerala High Court said that in many connected matters it had issued various orders regarding crowd management at Sabarimala, in order to ensure that maximum number of devotees have a comfortable darshan at Sabarimala
Kerala High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Hrishikesh Roy and A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar, JJ. was seized of a petition structured as
“Peaceful darsan is of paramount importance” Kerala High Court: A Division Bench comprising of P.R. Ramachandra Menon and N. Anil Kumar, JJ.
Kerala High Court: A Division bench comprising of P.R. Ramachandra Menon and Devan Ramachandran, JJ. dismissed a civil writ petition challenging a
Supreme Court: The Bench comprising of CJ Ranjan Gogoi and R.F Nariman, A.M. Khanwilkar, Dr D.Y. Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra, JJ. will
In the theatre of life, it seems, man has put the autograph and there is no space for a woman even to
Supreme Court: The 5-Judge Constitution Bench comprising of CJ Dipak Misra and Rohinton Nariman, AM Khanwilkar, Dr DY Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra
Supreme Court: The 5-Judge Constitution Bench comprising of CJ Dipak Misra, Rohinton Nariman, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra JJ., resumed
Supreme Court: The 5-judge Constitution Bench comprising of CJ Dipak Misra, Rohinton Nariman, AM Khanwilkar, DY Chandrachud and Indu Malhotra JJ., commenced