In ‘Jasvir Singh Vs. State of Punjab, CWP No. 5429 of 2010, the learned Single Judge of Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed the petition praying for enforcement of their right to have conjugal life and procreate within the jail premises.
The Delhi High Court, in Ajay Gautam vs Union of India, W.P (C) No. 112/2014, rejected the prayer of the Petitioner to restrain screening of the Hindi Film, PK, on the ground that it hurts religious sentiments, especially of Hindus.
iJustice has prepared a master database, one stop shop, of all laws recommended for repeal by the Law Commission, the PC Jain Commission and the 100 Laws Report, but not yet removed from the statute books.
In Jafar Imam Naqvi v. Election Commission of India, W.P. (C) No. 429 of 2014, a Supreme Court Bench comprising of Dipak Misra and N. V. Ramana, JJ dismissed the writ petition seeking relief against hate speech during election campaigns filed under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution.
In Lyca Production Pvt. Ltd vs The Government of Tamil Nadu Writ Petition No.29325 of 2014, the Madras High Court allowed the petition seeking a writ of mandamus from the High Court of Madras to direct the Respondents to grant protection to enable them to have their name exhibited as the Producer of the film in the prints as well as the publicity material.
In its decisions dated March 12, 2014, the Bombay High Court, before Justice Mridula Bhatkar in the case of Mahesh Balkrishana Dandane v. State of Maharashtra (Criminal Anticipatory Bail Application No. 27 0f 2014 and Criminal Intervention Application No.
A two judge-bench in the Bombay High Court in the case of Mrs. Swati Sayaji Patil v State of Maharashtra and Ors. CRPIL. 56-14, PIL. 95-13, PILL. 97-14 & NML. 456-14 held that children below the age of 18 would not be permitted to take part in Dahi Handi festival and passed a series of directions for the government, organizers and municipal authorities.
In Vishaka and others vs. State of Rajasthan and others WP (Crl.) Nos.666-70 of 1990 decided on 13.08.1997, the Supreme Court (‘the Court’) found itself dealing with the issue of sexual harassment of women in the workplace.