Principle of Parity

“Equality means parity of treatment under parity of conditions. The rule of parity is the equal treatment of equals in equal circumstances.” – Chief Justice of India, Hon’ble Justice A.N. Ray, State of Kerala v. N.M. Thomas, AIR 1976 SC 490. “The imposition of a penalty in disciplinary proceeding lies in the sole domain of […]

Read more "Principle of Parity"

Principles of Natural Justice III

“Willie (William) Slaney v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1956 SC 116 explained the concept of ‘prejudice caused to the accused’ and held: “Trial is not vitiated unless the accused can show substantial prejudice. Some violations of the Code will be so obvious that they will speak for themselves as, for example, a refusal to give the […]

Read more "Principles of Natural Justice III"

Consortium

“In legal parlance, ‘consortium’ is a compendious term which encompasses ‘spousal consortium’, ‘parental consortium’, and ‘filial consortium’. The right to consortium would include the company, care, help, comfort, guidance, solace and affection of the deceased. With respect to a spouse, it would include sexual relations with the deceased spouse. Parental consortium is granted to the […]

Read more "Consortium"

#The377Debate II : 06.09.2018

Navtej Singh Johar v. UOI, [Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 76 of 2016] was filed for declaring Section 377 to be unconstitutional. It was held by:  Dipak Misra CJI and A.M. Khanwilkar J. The phrase ‘against the order of nature’ has neither been defined in any provision of the IPC. What is ‘against the order of nature’? Procreation […]

Read more "#The377Debate II : 06.09.2018"

A Mensa Et Thoro

Parliament often begins to legislate with remarkable vigor but about the same time it gives up the attempt to govern. It begins to lay down general rules, entrusting its working to Officials/Secretaries of State/Boards of Commissioners/Law Courts, who are endowed with new statutory powers. Once or twice upon a time, Ecclesiastical Courts could pronounce a divorce, a mensa et […]

Read more "A Mensa Et Thoro"

Clear and Present Danger

A single revolutionary spark may kindle a fire that, smouldering for a time, may burst into a sweeping and destructive configuration. It was the judgment of Holmes J. in Schenck v. United States, 249 US 47 at 52 (1910) that gave rise to the test of “clear and present danger” for determining whether restrictions on liberty would be […]

Read more "Clear and Present Danger"