Case Summary : Constitution of India

AK Gopalan v. State of Madras [AIR 1950 SC 27.] – Only Judiciary – Preventive Detention Act does not violate the provisions of Article 19, 21 and 22.

Anuradha Bhasin v. UOI [2020 SCC OnLine SC 25] – Only JudiciaryInternet services are protected under Article 19 (1) (g) of the Indian Constitution. However, they are also subjected to the provisions of Article 19 (6).

Chebrolu Leela Prasad Rao & Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. [2020 SCC OnLine SC 383] – Only Judiciary

Common Cause v. UOI [AIR 2018 SC 1665] – Only JudiciaryThe Supreme Court ruled that the right to die with dignity is a fundamental right and that persisting treatment against a patient’s desires violates not only the concept of explicit consent, but also corporeal privacy and bodily integrity, both of which have been identified as aspects of privacy. 

D. K. Basu v. State of W. B. [1996 SC] – Only Judiciary – deaths in police lock-ups and custody.

D.C. Wadhwa v. State of Bihar [1987 SC] – Only JudiciaryRepeated promulgation of the same Ordinance

Golaknath v. State of Punjab [1967 AIR 1643] – Only JudiciaryParliament cannot make legislative amendments in contravention of Fundamental Rights as well as cannot amend Articles enshrining Fundamental Rights.

Hussainaira Khatoon v. State of Bihar [1979 AIR 1369] – Only JudiciaryIt discusses a broader interpretation of Article 21 and holds that a speedy trial is a fundamental right of all citizens. The case also addressed the human rights of prisoners, stating that prisoners should be provided with free legal aid and a speedy trial.

I.R. Coelho v. State of Tamil Nadu [AIR 2007 SC 861] – Only JudiciaryAny legislation that infringes on fundamental rights or violates the Basic Structure of the Constitution shall be subjected to judicial review and Schedule 9 does not save it from judicial scrutiny.

Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala [2019 11 SCC 1] – Only Judiciary – Sabarimala shrine case

Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain [AIR 1975 SC 2299] – Only JudiciaryFree and Fair election is the Basic Structure of the Constitution. It comes under the authority of the courts to have judicial review over elections.

Indra Sawhney v. UOI [AIR 1993 SC 477] – Only JudiciaryThe case dealt with multiple important aspects of reservation provisions in the Constitution such as reservation cap of 50%, reservation for economically backward class, division of backward class into more backward class and backward class and so on.

Joseph Shine v. UOI [AIR 2018 SC 4898] – Only Judiciary –  About Section 377

Justice KS Puttaswamy v. UOI [2017 10 SCC 1] – Only JudiciaryRight to Privacy was declared to be an inalienable and separate fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution.

Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala [AIR 1973 SC 1461] – Only JudiciaryParliament cannot amend Articles enshrining Fundamental Rights as well as Concept of Basic Structure of the Constitution.

L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India [1997 SC] – Only JudiciaryOuster of power of Judicial Review and vesting the same in administrative tribunals to the total exclusion of the High Courts under Article 226 of the Constitution – not permissible.

Lily Thomas v. UOI [AIR 2000 SC 1650] – Only JudiciaryThe court held that conversion to another religion merely for the purpose of Bigamy is illegal and the second marriage will be considered as void.

M Nagaraj v. UOI [AIR 2007 SC 71] – Only JudiciaryThe case dealt with the validity of Article 16 (4A) and 16 (4B) as well as gave a three prong test for Backward classes so as to grant reservation in promotion.

Maneka Gandhi v. UOI [AIR 1978 SC 597] – Only JudiciaryRight to Travel Abroad comes under the scope of Right to Personal Liberty under Article 21.

Minerva Mills v. UOI [AIR 1980 SC 1789] – Only JudiciaryParliamentary power to amend the Constitution is restricted by the Basic Structure and hence 42nd Amendment Act was held unconstitutional.

Mukesh Kumar & Anr. V. State of Uttarakhand [2020 SCC Online SC 148] – Only JudiciaryThe court determined that Articles 16 (4) and 16 (4A) are merely enabling provisions and that the right to promotion is subject to the judgement of the State Government. The State Government is not required to create reservations, and the courts have no power to persuade it to do so.

Murli S. Deora v. Union of India [2001 SC] – Only Judiciaryprohibition on smoking in public places 

NALSA v. UOI [AIR 2014 SC 1863] – Only JudiciaryIt legally acknowledged non-binary gender identifications and upheld transgender people’s fundamental rights in India.

Navtej Singh Johar v. UOI [AIR 2018 SC 4321] – Only JudiciaryIt overturned Suresh Kumar Koushal judgement and unanimously repealed Section 377, making same-sex relationships amongst consenting individuals of majority age legal.

Pradeep Kumar Biswas v. Indian Institute of Chemical Biology – Only Judiciary – CSIR a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution 

Prithviraj Chouhan v. UOI [2020 SCC OnLine SC 159] – Only JudiciaryThe Supreme Court deals with the constitutional validity of Section 18A of the SC ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act, 2018. 

PUCL v. UOI [AIR 2003 SC 2363] – Only JudiciaryThe Supreme Court reiterated its position, holding that voters have a right to obtain information regarding political candidates as per the provisions of Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution.

S.P. Anand v. H.D. Deve Gowda [1997 SC] – Only JudiciaryCan a person who is not a member of either House of Parliament be appointed as the Prime Minister of India?

Secretary, Ministry of Defence v. Babita Puniya & Ors. [2020 7 SCC 469] – Only JudiciaryThe Supreme Court declared that women’s permanent commission shall be granted in the navy and army as per the constitutional provisions in India and Article 14 and 39. 

Selvi v. State of Karnataka (2010) 7 SCC 263 – Only Judiciary – validity of narcoanalysis

Shankari Prasad v. Union of India, 1952 – Only Judiciary – First Amendment was challenged. “In the context of article 13, “law” must be taken to mean rules or regulations made in exercise of ordinary legislative power and not amendments to the Constitution made in exercise of constituent power, with the result that article 13(2) does not affect amendments made under article 368.”

Shayara Bano v. UOI [AIR 2017 9 SCC 1 (SC)] – Only JudiciaryThe practise of Triple Talaq was held as unconstitutional.

Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra [1983 SC 378] – Only JudiciaryThe right to live with dignity under Article 21 was extended to female prisoners and the State was directed to make provisions for the protection of their rights via free legal aid and freedom from ill-treatment in prisons.

Shreya Singhal v. UOI [AIR 2015 SC 1523] – Only JudiciarySection 66A of IT Act is in contravention of the provisions of Article 19 of the Constitution and hence was struck down by the court.

SR Bommai v. UOI [(1994) 3 SCC 1] – Only JudiciaryThe decision sought to limit political abuse of Article 356 as well as deciding that it falls under the purview of Judicial Review.

U. N. R. Rao v. Indira Gandhi [1971 SC] – Only Judiciary

Unnikrishnan v. State of Andhra Pradesh [1993 AIR 217] – Only JudiciaryThe Supreme Court declared Right to Education as a part of right to life as under Article 21.

UOI v. Association for Democratic Reforms [2002 AIR 2112] – Only Judiciaryelectors have a fundamental right to know the origins of candidates running for public office. 

Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan [AIR 1997 SC 3011] – Only JudiciaryThe Supreme Court issued the well-known Vishakha guidelines, requiring both the private and public industries to develop frameworks to address sexual harassment complaints.

Similar Posts