This article has been written by Deepika, pursuing BA-LLB at IIMT & School of Law, GGSIPU, Delhi. In this article, she has analyzed Bhim Singh v. State of J&K, a famous case of the legal maxim ‘injuria sine damno’.

Introduction

In order to be successful in an action for tort, the plaintiff has to prove that, some legal damage has been caused to him. Unless there has been a violation of a legal right, there can be no action under the law of torts. If there has been a violation of legal right, the same is actionable even if as a consequence thereof, the plaintiff has suffered any loss or not. This is expressed by the maxim “Injuria sine damno”. This case Bhim Singh v. State of J&k is a very important case of this maxim.

Bench

O C Reddy, V Khalid

Date of judgement

22 November 1985

Issues

Whether monetary compensation was a suitable remedy or not?
Whether the detention of the M. L. A was valid or not?

Articles involved

Article 21, Article 22(2), and Article 32

Maxim involved

Injuria sine damno

Facts of the case

Mr Bhim Singh an MLA of Jammu and Kashmir was arrested and detained in police custody and was deliberately prevented from attending the sessions of the legislative assembly to be held on 11th September 1985. He was arrested on an intervening night between 9th and 10th September 1985 by the station house officer of Quiz Kunda police station, on the allegation that a case under section 153A of Ranbir Penal Code was registered against him for delivering an inflammatory speech at the public meeting held near parade ground, Jammu on 8th September 1985. Earlier, on August 17, 1985, the opening day of the budget session of the legislative assembly, Bhim Singh was suspended from the assembly. When he questioned the suspension in the High court of Jammu & Kashmir, the order of suspension was stayed by the High court. He was arrested on the intervening night of 9th and 10th, when he was proceeding from Jammu to Srinagar. September He had to attend sessions of the legislative assembly on 11th September, where he had to cast a crucial vote. He couldn’t cast vote because of the detention, but the candidate for him he wanted to vote won the election. Although there was no actual loss to the plaintiff there was violation of his legal right. Also, he has not produced before the Magistrate till 13th September, while he should have been produced before the magistrate within 24 hours. As his wife didn’t get any information of him since last few days, she filed a writ of Habeas Corpus before the Supreme Court.

Judgement

On the inquiry of the Supreme Court, it was found that Mr Bhim Singh was illegally detained by the police personnel, aided either by collision or by a casual attitude with the Magistrate, who ordered for remand without production of the arrested person before him. The Supreme court judges O. Chinnappa Reddy criticized the conduct of the magistrate and sub judge, stating that they have no concern for the subject out of either casual behaviour or worse than they had potentially colluded with the police who had deliberately acted in malafide. The Court pointed out that the Magistrate acted without any sense of responsibility or genuine concern for the personal liberty and the police arrested the imprisoned with mischievous and malicious intent and it was certainly was a gross violation of the constitutional right of the accused person under article 21 and 22(2). There was also a violation of his Constitutional right to attend the assembly session. The court in this landmark judgement of tort law in India, by exercising its power to award compensation under Article 32(2), directed the state to pay Rs. 50000 to Bhim Singh a compensation to him for violation of his constitutional right by way of exemplary cost.

In the normal cases of injuria sine damno, where the plaintiff had suffered no harm and yet the wrongful act is actionable, generally nominal damages are awarded. If, however, the court feels that the violation of a legal right is owing to mischievous and malicious act, as had happened in this case, the court may grant exemplary damages.

Conclusion

This case was a landmark case which evolved the tort law in India. This case revolves around wrongful confinement and injuria sine damnum. The court gave very appreciable decision in this case, as there no other than the one adopted by court to compensate the plaintiff. In this court has also narrowed the space between state and citizen. By directing the state to pay compensation the Supreme court established the following principle that state and citizen are at an equal position in the eyes of law. This decision also shows the weakening of the original doctrine of sovereign immunity and the changing concept of state. In this case, the Supreme court recognized the liability of the state to pay compensation, when Rights to life and personal liberty as guaranteed under Article 21 of the constitution has been violated by the officials of the state.

Latest Posts

This article has been written by Anurag Maharaj, pursuing Bachelor of laws at Lloyd Law School, Greater Noida. In this article, he has tried to define the “Parliamentary privileges”.

Introduction

Parliamentary privilege refers to the rights and immunities that Parliament as an entity and parliamentarians enjoys in their individual capacity, without which they can not perform their duties as delegated to them by the Constitution. Both parliamentary houses have the privileges to operate effectively and efficiently, and to carry out their duties without interruption or intervention of any sort. Collectively, each house and its representatives are granted the privileges individually. Therefore, it can be inferred that the term privileges refer to the particular rights and advantages that parliamentary members enjoy over the Indian citizen. The Parliamentary privileges are laid down in Article 105 of the Indian Constitution and in Article 194 of the State legislatures.

Article-105: Parliament of India Privileges

Powers, privileges, etc., of parliamentary houses and of members and committees:-

1.Freedom of speech:- There shall be freedom of speech in Parliament, subject to the provisions of the Constitution and to the laws and standing orders regulating Parliament’s procedure.

2. In certain respects, the rights, privileges and immunities of each House of Parliament and of the members and committees of each House shall, from time to time, be decided by statute by Parliament and, until such time as this House and its members and committees have been established, immediately before Section 15 of the Constitution comes into force ( 44th amendment ) Act 1978.

3. No Member of Parliament shall be liable in any court for what he or she has said or voted in Parliament or any of its committees and no person shall be liable for any report, text, vote or proceedings to be published by or under the authority of any House of Parliament.

4. The provisions of clauses (1 ), ( 2) and (3) shall extend to persons who, by virtue of this Constitution, have the right to speak in, and otherwise participate in, the proceedings of, a House of Parliament or any of its committees as they relate to Members of Parliament.

Article-194: State Legislatures Privileges

Under Article 194, the same provisions are stated, in that members of a state legislature are referred instead of parliamentary members.

1. Freedom of speech:- The Legislature of each State shall have freedom of speech, subject to the provisions of this Constitution and to the Rules and Standing Orders governing the proceedings of the Legislature.

2. No member of the Legislature of a State shall be liable in any court for that which he has said or voted in the Legislature or any committee thereof, and no person shall be liable for the publication by or under the authority of the House of such a Legislature of any article, text, vote or proceeding.

3. The powers, privileges and immunities of the House of the Legislature of the State and of the members and committees of the House of that Legislature shall be those defined by law from time to time and, until such time as this is specified, those of that House and of its members and committees immediately before the entry into force of Section 26 of the Constitution Act on Amendment No 44, 1978.

4. The provisions of clauses (1 ), ( 2) and (3) shall extend in respect of individuals who, by virtue of this Constitution, have the right to speak in, and otherwise engage in, the proceedings of a House of the Legislature of a State or any of its committees as they relate to members of that legislature.

Case law:- P.V. NARSIMHA STATE v. RAO (1998)

The facts of the case are – some of the bribes that the MP has received to vote against the no-confidence motion against Prime Minister P.V. Narsimha Rao. He was charged under the IPC and Prevention of Corruption Act on the grounds that, while serving as the Prime Minister, he bribed some MPs to vote against the motion of no-confidence. It was held by the majority of the Court that, according to Article 105(2), parliamentarians would be granted immunity and, thus, the MP’s bribe conduct would be granted immunity in spite of everything they say or any vote they give in Parliament. The Court further clarified that here the word “everything” is to be understood as a broader concept. In a wider context, the Court viewed the word “anything” and did not convict P.V. Rao Narsimha.

Other privileges:-

(1) Freedom from arrest:- According to this privilege, during a period of 40 days before and 40 days after the house session[viii], no member of parliament or state legislature shall be arrested or imprisoned in civil process. If a member is arrested during this time, he shall be released for free attendance at the session. This right does not apply to arrests or incarceration on the grounds of criminal proceedings or court contempt or preventive detention.

2) Excluding strangers:- In the past, the right to exclude strangers or non-members and to hold secret sessions exercised. The goal is to exclude the risk of Members being intimidated. The strangers may attempt to interfere in the debate from galleries.

3. Right to publish debates and proceedings:- Although Parliament does not prohibit the press from publishing its proceedings by convention, the House is technically entitled to prohibit such publication. Also, although a Member has parliamentary privilege of freedom of expression, he has no right to publish it outside Parliament. Any breaching rule can be held liable for any libellous matter which it may contain under the rules of the common law.

4. Right to regulate House internal affairs:- The House has the right to regulate its affairs within it. A House member is free to say what he wants subject only to the House’s or the committee concerned ‘s internal discipline. The Governor is empowered to convene the State Legislative Assembly Session. But he has no legislative power to direct the Speaker of an Assembly on how to handle the House’s proceedings.

5. The right to punish for Contempt of the House:- Each house of the legislature has the right to punish its members or non-members for contempt or infringement of the house’s privilege. In India, it has been established that a house can punish not only for the contempt of the present but also for the contempt of the past.

Conclusion

Parliamentary privilege refers to the rights and immunities that Parliament as an entity and parliamentarians enjoys in their individual capacity, without which they can not perform their duties as delegated to them by the Constitution. The privileged rights are freedom of speech, publication of the report, excluding strangers, rights to publish debates and proceedings, right to regulate House internal affairs, the right to punish for the contempt of the house etc.

Latest Posts

This article has been written by Sharat Gopal, pursuing BA-LLB at Delhi Metropolitan Education, GGSIPU. In this article, he has discussed private defence and its essential under the law of tort.

Introduction

Tort

According to Salmon, a tort is a civil wrong for which the remedy is common law action for the unliquidated( an amount that cannot be foreseen by a fixed formula) damages caused to the person. But this civil wrong is not exclusively based on breach of contract or breach of trust or other merely equitable obligations.

On the other hand, Winfield states that the tortious liability arise from the breach of duty which is primarily fixed by law. And the duty towards persons is general and the breach of this duty is redressable by an action for unliquidated damages.

Both these views are contrary to each other. Salmond’s definition is accepted more by people as it is more practical in nature. On the other hand, Winfield’s definition is more of theoretical in nature.

Law of tort is not codified in India. It was adopted from the English Common Law. In India, unlike other countries, moral wrong is not punishable. In countries like Canada, who follow common law, have moral value laws know as Samaritan Law. In these countries moral wrong is punishable. Eg. Not giving water to a thirsty man, when you are carrying water with you, is morally wrong. This is punishable is countries like Canada, but not in India.

General defences

Every person in the world has a right to protect himself from any attack or harm, this will cause him injury. The same applies to all laws and also to tort law. When the person is accused of an act, he has the right to defend himself from the claim that the plaintiff has brought against him. There is a list of general defences that are accepted in the law of tort. These defences are-

Volenti non-fit injuria,
Statutory Authority,
Plaintiff the wrongdoer,
Necessity,
Inevitable accident,
Act of God,
Mistake, and
Private Defence.

Private defence

In general defences, Private defence is one the most used defence. It is defence provided not just for the body of the person but also for the property. Law of private defence can be traced back to early civilization where every person had a right to defend his/her life and property. As history abounds with instances where communities or tribes had exercised their right of private defence to their life and property. Also in two worlds wars which was witnessed by the whole world, was a conflict to protect their land, water or resources from intervention by countries. Private Defence is a natural right to protect oneself against any violent act of others to his life or property.

Now it can be understood as that if ever a man in threat or in terror of present death or harm, get compelled to do any act which is against the law, then he will be totally excused from the act. As no one or no law shall expect a man to abandon his life for the preservation of law. But that act must be justified as it was preceded with an imminent danger.

Hence, the law permits the use of a reasonable force against an imminent danger to protect one’s person and property. And persons that act is excused to the extent of reasonable force that was required to avoid that harm.

To use private defence there requires main conditions to be fulfilled i.e. –

Imminent threat– There should be an imminent or instant danger to the life of a person or loss to property. For eg, A saw B trying to rape C. Seeing the immediate danger to life of C, A hit on B’s head with a stone present there. Here A used private defence for the danger which was present at the time of use of private defence. Also, this can be understood using the case of Morris Vs. Nugent, where A’s dog attacked B and bite him but when after attacking dog stepped back and started running away, B stood and shot the dog. In this case, court held that if B would have shot the dog when it was attacking him then he could have successfully claimed the defence, but as according to the facts of the case he shot the dog when there was no imminent or immediate danger present and hence won’t get a defence.
Proportional force – According to this, the force used against the danger to the life of a person or to a property must be proportionate to the actual danger. The force used must be reasonable to avoid that harm and must not extend the dangerous act. For eg. If a theft enter one’s house but after getting caught he threat the person with a knife standing far away from him and after that the owner of the house getting angry shot him dead. Here the force used is not reasonable as the owner must have shot him in his cleg or somewhere to just injure him, but killing the person where there was no just grave danger to life, the private defence won’t apply. Hence, if A hit on B’s head, B cannot justify his defence by drawing sword and cutting of the A’s head.

Case law:-

In the case of Bird V. Holbrook (1823) 4 Bing. 628, 130 E.R. 91, Holbrook was the defendant who installed spring-gun trap in his garden to catch an intruder, who had been stealing from his garden for long. He did not post any warning sign or board. Now, Bird who was the petitioner entered Holbrook’s garden chasing his escaped bird and got trapped and gain severe damages to his knee. Here the court held that defendants intention here was not to catch the intruder but to cause harm to him as he also didn’t post any warning sign. Hence, he was liable for his actions and didn’t get any defence.

Conclusion

The defence of private defence is more like a right to protect ones life and property. It is a natural right which has been recognised not just by the law of tort but has also been provided as a defence in criminal law under IPC,1860. Though this defence can easily be misused and can also be used as an excuse for the commission of a crime. To avoid this the essentials of private defence i.e., Reasonable threat, proportionate force and time to recourse must be satisfied.

Latest Posts

This article has been written by Tanya Gupta, a student pursuing BA LLB from Ideal Institute of Management and Technology and School of Law, affiliated to Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi. This article focuses on the rule of harmonious construction and landmark cases related to it.

INTRODUCTION

Is it law really plays an important role in society? Every individual living in society must understand the importance of law. Law is that powerful tool which keeps a society peaceful and prevents conflicts between people by regulating their behaviour. The laws are enacted to regulate the society are drafted by Legal Experts and it is well anticipated that laws enacted will not be specific and contain some ambiguity. Judiciary plays an important role to remove and resolving these inconsistencies.

We all are well known aware that there are three wings of the government i.e. legislature, executive and judiciary. The role of interpretation of statues comes into play and is of utmost importance for the Judiciary to render justice correctly by interpreting the statues in the way in which the society demands.

Doctrines are” a rule, principle, theory or tenet of the law”. One of the doctrines is Harmonious Construction it is one of the principles of the interpretation of statutes. They follow the principle of a statute shall be read as a whole and should confirm benefits to the people.

Doctrine of Harmonious Construction

According to Salmond, “by construction is meant, the process by which the court seeks to ascertain the meaning of the legislature through the medium of authoritative forms in which it is expressed.”

The Constitution of India makes a two-fold distribution of legislative powers:

With respect to the territory;
With respect to the subject matter.

Article 245, Constitution of India is related to the territorial jurisdiction and Art. 246 is related to the subject matter of lawmaking power of Parliament and State Legislature.

The list of legislation- Union list, state list and concurrent list enshrined under schedule 7 of Indian Constitution. The Union Government has an exclusive power to make laws on the subject mentioned in the Union List i.e. of national importance. The State Government has the power to make laws in subjects mentioned in the State List i.e. of local importance and for the subjects mentioned in the Concurrent List both Central and State government has exclusive power. But in the case conflicts arises Central law will prevail.

In a statue, when there are two provisions which are in apparent conflict with each other, they should be interpreted such that effect can be given to both. When there is a conflict between two or more statues or two or more parts of the statue then the doctrine of the harmonious construction needs to be adopted.

According to this rule, a statute should be read as a whole and one provision of the act should be constructed with the reference to other provision in the same Act so as to make a consistent enactment of the whole statue and to remove inconsistency or repugnancy.

It helps to bring harmony between the list referred in Schedule 7, Constitution of India.

In the case when it is impossible for harmonization between statues or between two or more provisions of the statues, then the court’s decision regarding the provision shall prevail.

Landmark Case Laws: Doctrine of Harmonious Construction

Principles of rules of Harmonious Construction: CIT v. HINDUSTAN BULK CARRIERS (2003)3SCC57

In this landmark case, the Apex Court laid down five principles of rule of harmonious construction:

1.Courts must avoid a head-on clash of seemingly contradicting provisions and they must construe the contradictory provisions so as to harmonize them

2. The provision of one section cannot be used to defeat the provision contained in another unless the court, despite all its effort, is unable to find a way to reconcile their differences.

3. When it is impossible to completely reconcile the differences in contradictory provisions, the court must interpret them in such a way so that effect is given both the provisions as much as possible.

4. Courts must also keep in mind that interpretation that reduces one provision to a useless number or dead is not harmonious construction.

5. To harmonize is not to destroy any statutory provision or to render it fruitless.

Raj Krishan v Binod, AIR 1954

In this case, two provisions of Representation of People Act, 1951, which were in apparent conflict were brought before the court. Section 33 (2) says that a government servant can nominate or a second a candidate in the election but section 123(8) says that a government servant cannot assist any candidate in the election except by casting his vote. The Supreme Court observed that both these provisions should be harmoniously interpreted and held that a government servant was entitled to nominate or a second candidate seeking election in State Legislative Assembly.

Venkataramana Devaru v. State of Mysore, AIR 1997 SC1006

In this case, Apex Court applied the doctrine of harmonious construction in resolving a conflict between article 25(2)(b) and Article 26(b) of the Constitution of India and it was held that the right of every religious denomination or any sections thereof to manages its own affairs in matters to religion [art. 25)(b)] is subject to a law made by State providing for social welfare and reform or throwing open of Hindu religious institution of public character to all classes and section of Hindus.

Conclusion

As there are three organs of the government legislature makes the laws; the executive implements the law and judiciary interpret the laws. There are three lists i.e. Union, State and concurrent list. As statues are drafted by legislature there is every possibility of the situation of inconsistency, ambiguity, repugnancy etc. In such situations, the rules of interpretation of statutes come into play and the provisions are construed so as to give maximum effect to them and to render justice to the situation at hand. The principle of harmonious construction plays a very important role in interpreting the statues and is used in an abundance of cases. It is a thumb rule to the interpretation of any statue. The judiciary should interpret the statues properly and rendered justice to the citizens of the country.

Latest Posts

Archives

This article has been written by Alok Kumar. This article deals with the topic of COVID-19 and effect of this virus on international relations and how what is the solution for all these issues which is the world is facing right now.

INTRODUCTION

One must observe the amazing date of 22nd March 2020 when every person in India was relied upon to appear on the side of each one of those experts who have been continually endeavouring towards doing combating the fatal Corona infection that has caused a great many passing’s over the globe. As known to all, this infection began in Wuhan, China during the long stretch of December, 2019

So as to comprehend the purposes for expanding mortality because of this virus, one must endeavour to get adequate comprehension of the life structures of Coronavirus. According to a report by the World Health Organization, these viruses have a place with the Coronaviridae family and they attack both humans and animals. Know that the ongoing coronavirus found in people in Wuhan was not recently perceived and is presenting dangers to the human race including disorders like Middle East Respiratory Syndrome and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome. (1)

The infection that fundamentally started in China perceives bats as a prevailing transporter however the WHO specialists state that there are two or three different animals that go about as mode of move of infection from animal species to people. So as to learn different wellsprings of this virus, natural testing was led from the Huanan Wholesale Seafood Market and other encompassing markets in China. Note that this infection doesn’t exist in the air however lays on a surface.

So as to maintain a strategic distance from the transmission of this virus, it is significant that individuals abstain from building up any physical contact with one another. According to a report by the WHO, two of the definitely influenced urban areas of China are Wuhan, Guangdong and Sichuan. The explores and insights introduced by the WHO are prevalently quickened through reports by these areas in China. One must realize that this virus didn’t create inside different nations yet spread only because of individuals interacting with the tainted from over the globe. (2)

Review this pandemic emergency with a global viewpoint, it very well may be said that the need of great importance is a solid coordinated effort between countries regardless of the previous incongruities since one must comprehend that in the long run its human battling for human.

ITS SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE GLOBE

Before one abides into the complexities of the virus and its outcomes at a worldwide scale, it is imperative to comprehend the precise importance of what precisely is a Pandemic malady and in which conditions are a sickness thought about Pandemic. According to the definition given by the World Health Organization, an influenza pandemic is said to have happened when another influenza virus develops and spreads over the globe and the serious issue encompassing this is the way that individuals have less insusceptibility against this Pandemic illness. COVID 19 is presently a Pandemic sickness attributable to the way that it has affected a large number of individuals over the globe. (3)

One must have great information about the courses of transmission of Coronavirus to learn preventive measures relating to the equivalent. The World Health Organization reports state that COVID 19 is transmitted through beads and fomites because of the unprotected physical contact between the contaminated individual and the remainder of the world. A typical idea encompassing flu virus is that these are dominatingly airborne however COVID 19 is seen not as airborne yet just through physical contact. (4)

The transmission of infection among countries happened at an incredibly quick pace. In nations like India, the vast majority of the patients who were discovered contaminated with this virus had worldwide travel history and didn’t build up this inside the nation. Without a specific fix of COVID 19, the main method for limiting the unfortunate impact of this illness is a wide range of endeavours to forestall this. Social Distancing is the main way that can forestall the spreading of this virus among the majority. According to the WHO report, practically all the locales over the globe have announced affirmed crown cases. These regions basically incorporate Western Pacific, South East Asia, Region of Americas, European region and Eastern Mediterranean region.

ITS EFFECT ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

The episode of this lethal illness executed individuals in enormous numbers as well as antagonistically influenced the worldwide economies and global relations among the countries. For example, India saw a brief conclusion in the SENSEX which impacts affected the economy in general. The Chinese economy will undoubtedly observe a stoppage because of it being the focal point of the virus yet one must focus on the effect on the current exchange strains among the US and China.

According to the stage one understanding between the two nations, China vowed to realize an expansion in the imports of products and enterprises fabricated and gave by the US separately yet because of this pandemic crises, there is a high likelihood that China probably won’t cling to its guarantee attributable to the monetary stoppage it is at present seeing. The budgetary markets across countries have shaken. This is obviously clear from the slamming GDP of countries over the globe and the increased issues of supporting business sector powers inside pretty much every country.

It ought to likewise be noticed that in the midst of the considerable number of pressures, countries by and by stand joined in the fight against coronavirus. According to a newspaper report, the Russian armed force was sent as a piece of clinical assistance to Italy. It must be realized that Italy has been confronting very brutal conditions as far as the spread of the destructive coronavirus. In under a quarter of a year, the infection has brought about the greater part of medical clinics being involved by several sufferers. (5)

Roughly, fifteen thousand have been tainted as of 13th of March, 2020. This noble activity by Russia is really helping Italy battle the wellbeing emergency that it is experiencing. It is appropriate to take note of that pioneers from around the world have been engaging masses to follow and energize social distancing in the quest for forestalling more instances of COVID 19 that could emerge in future. Taking a gander at the cooperation among countries, it tends to be fought that this wellbeing emergency has impacts affected the relations among countries in financial just as non-money related terms. Roughly, fifteen thousand have been tainted as of 13th of March, 2020. This noble activity by Russia is really helping Italy battle the wellbeing emergency that it is experiencing. It is appropriate to take note of that pioneers from around the world have been engaging masses to follow and energize social distancing in the quest for forestalling more instances of COVID 19 that could emerge in future. Taking a gander at the cooperation among countries, it tends to be fought that this wellbeing emergency has impact sly affected the relations among countries in financial just as non-money related terms.

CRITICAL ANALYSIS AND PROBABLE WAY FORWARD

Breaking down the present circumstance in India and across countries, it is essential to take note of that solitary the residents themselves are fit for controlling the spread of this virus through keeping up considerable distance among them. They should abstain from visiting any open spot and should rehearse self-segregation so as to forestall any additional spread of this virus. Pioneers of countries over the globe have been attempting to persuade masses into rehearsing social distancing through a few foundation of correspondence like social media, press, radio and TV. As a Researcher, it is critical to break down that if the spread of COVID 19 isn’t contained during these months, it may elevate up to the third stage which if at all occurs, will be hard to manage. (6)

The main path forward is to carefully cling to the administration discharged guidelines until the nations can contain the virus. This will not just assistance the majority living inside a specific nation yet, in addition, will stop the uncontrolled transmission of Corona to different nations since individuals will in general visit various nations following work, get-away, and so on. Limiting development starting with one nation then onto the next will likewise tackle the issue of speedy transmission of the virus thus as though at all the activity of self-isolation doesn’t work for the citizen’s., at that point, the legislature may receive the system including limitation of development not inside the nation however between at least two nations.

CONCLUSION

The Pandemic crises of COVID 19 isn’t settled however is as yet advancing as far as number of passing’s over the globe. In this way, attesting any announcement of end won’t be proper in light of the fact that the issue has not yet seen a defeat. It is relevant to take note of that the Pandemic crises have prompted a change in financial and exchange relations that the neighbouring nations share, yet it is intriguing to realize that every one of these nations remain in solidarity against the virus and are endeavouring hard to control the circumstance. Aside from this, comprehend this virus fundamentally spreads through social contact as it requires a surface to settle down not at all like other influenza viruses that are airborne. (7)

Mindfulness in regards to the life structures and spread of the virus among the majority is significant with the goal that they are not diverted by counterfeit data. Nitty-gritty comprehension of the logical starting point of Coronavirus is imperative to pass judgment on the veracity of data being shared significantly over the social media platforms. It ought to be comprehended that the majority will, in general, accept a snippet of data when they are in a condition of frenzy. The equivalent has been occurring over the globe, because of the Pandemic crises which in the long run outcomes in superfluous frenzy where the time could have been profitably utilized in finding and following inventive preventive measures in a quest for fighting the spread of COVID 19.

This article has been written by Mansi Tyagi, a student at Symbiosis Law School, Pune. The international community is an amalgamation of States and many other independent entities. This article details the theories of recognition for such independent entities into states. It discusses the two theories viz. Constitutive and Declaratory. However, it will be interesting to note that none of the two theories is perfect in their realm of recognition.

What is Recognition of State?

“A State – wherefrom the study of politics starts and where it ends.” – J.W. Garner

The world today is globally connected and weaved into one international community, with each sovereign state as it’s member. And thus, to enjoy the membership of such a global community it is crucial to be recognised as a state. So first and foremost, A state can be briefly defined as a conglomeration of a certain population, living in a territory, with a sovereign government ruling them. Thus as laid down by the Montevideo convention (1933), the elements required to be validly construed as a state can be narrowed down to population, territory, government and sovereignty. Now, what exactly is the meaning of recognition of a state? To get a status of a state, the recognition i.e. a unilateral acknowledgement is given by the other states. Even though States are not the exclusive international actors and nor are they the only ones to have an international legal standing and yet primarily are the result of international recognition. These recognitions are for getting a statehood, a status of the sovereign state, and a part of the community where the other states exist. One might ask what benefit does a state get after acquiring such statehood. Firstly, it incorporates such a state into the already existing international community; secondly, the recognition is a proof that all the requisites for a state have been complied with; and, thirdly the status of a state gives it the rights and obligations to enjoy and follow in the global community. But why is it important to even acquire one in the first place? Long term survival, or end to the territorial wars or have a stable status, there may be several reasons. State recognition is mainly based on two theories: Constructive and Declarative.

Constitutive Theory

Since the theory recognizes and constitutes an entity into a state, thus it derives its name as the constitutive theory. Its main proponents were Hegal, Anzilotti, Holland and Oppenheim. This theory majorly propagates that for an entity to come into being as a state, it needs the consent of the other existing states. Thus we can say that unless the states approve and acknowledge an entity as a State, the entity won’t be made one irrespective of the requisites it fulfils of being a State. Even though the soviet bloc considered it to be illegal, with the recognition from the western states, Lithuania became the first ‘state’ of the 15 soviet republics to declare its independence and statehood. Likewise, another example of this theory can be the recognition of Poland and Czechoslovakia through the treaty of Versailles.

However, the theory has faced a considerable amount of criticism throughout time. The very obvious of all is the criticism that despite possessing all the elements of a State, an entity’s dependence on the recognition by other states to acquire statehood is unnecessary. Also, there can be no mutual and single time when all the states recognize the statehood of another. Furthermore, no state can be obligated practically to recognize an entity as a state. Bangladesh being one example. Despite being recognized by India since its independence, it was recognized by Pakistan, China and the US much later. States recognized under this theory have a political character and lack a legal one. Also, it is very clear that even though a state recognises an entity much later, it recognizes such entity’s acts from the date of its inception. This thus indicates that recognition is a mere formality for acquiring statehood, and thus Constitutive theory is much criticized on the lines it works upon.

Declaratory Theory

Article-3 of the Montevideo Conference lays down the Declaratory theory. Also known as the Evidentiary Theory, in many ways, the declaratory theory is the better version of the constitutive theory, overcoming almost all the gaps that the former consists of. The major exponents of the theory are Professor Hall, Pitt Cobett, Wagner and Brierly. Unlike the constitutive theory which exclusively declares the recognition to be the basis of acquiring statehood, the declaratory theory is the opposite. It just requires the evidence or declaration of statehood and recognition becomes a mere formality. In fact, the value of recognition is diminished to the extent that a state under this theory can exist without the recognition as well. Thus as soon as an entity possesses all the elements of a State, it comes into existence. The declaratory theory is even practised in International Law and thus has a better standing in the global standing.

Despite the simplistic way of being constituted into a State, the theory fails to explain the consequent rights of such states. There are many states which are unrecognized and yet hold the status of statehood. However, since they are not recognized by the already existing states, their position in the international community stays unnoticed. Taiwan is one such example. And since such states go unrecognized, they cannot develop diplomatic relations or sign any treaties with the already existing states.

Contemporary Position

With the present trend and acceptance of the international community, the declaration of statehood overpowers the constitutive theory. And thus, any entity becomes a state as soon as it completes the criteria of statehood. Since the recognition of such states is upon the sweet will of the already existing states, this may not pose a threat to their statehood; however, recognition has several benefits which cannot be availed by states unrecognized. The right to sign treaties, make diplomatic relations, the right to sue in other states, right to demand disputed property between the jurisdictions of two states, and many more privileges and immunities as against the international community. However, with the Evidentiary theory in practice, there are many states which are still up for recognition from other states and are mostly the regions of conflict for the recognizing states. Somali land, Taiwan, Turkish Republic of Cyprus, and many more. In today’s scenario, however, to secure recognition, states lay down conditions which may not be in line with the conditions for statehood but are merely diplomatic ways to carry on in the international community.

Latest Posts

This article has been written by Nimisha Mishra, a second-year student of NALSAR University of Law. In the article “Writ Jurisdiction and Private Sector,” the author has tried to explain the requirement of enforcing writ petition in private sectors as well.

Introduction

In India, under Part-III of the Constitution, citizens are guaranteed certain fundamental rights. Some of these rights are absolute in nature and any kinds of violation of these rights are intolerable. To safeguard the public interest and to ensure justice, citizens are provided with an option of filing a writ petition before the High Court under Article-226 and the Supreme Court under Article-32.

There are five types of writs which can be issued in the court of law and they are Habeas Corpus, Mandamus, Prohibition, Certiorari, Quo Warranto. But generally these writs are enforceable against the state only. Section 12 of the Constitution of India defines the state, as a sector which is either controlled or authorized by the government. Which means those entities which fall outside the definition of the state is considered as the private sector. Henceforth the court in P.D. Shamsadani v. Union Bank of India[1] drew the distinction between the public and private sector and held that fundamental rights are not enforceable against the private sector.

Horizontal and Vertical Application

Violation of fundamental rights can be protected against private and public sector by vertical and horizontal application. Vertical application of fundamental rights means the action can be brought only against the state and not against any private sector. Contrary to this horizontal application of fundamental rights can be enforced against the private sector.

Initially, after the enactment of the Constitution, the vertical application of fundamental rights was sufficient. The reasoning behind making only the state responsible for the fundamental rights of the citizens was the huge power and authority vested with it. To avoid the misuse of such power and to stop it turning into a totalitarian state, the constitutional maker considered it necessary to make state answerable for its action. State has to ensure the welfare of its citizen and is bound by the principle of non-discrimination, natural justice and fairness.

In S. Babu and others v. Managing Director, Hindustan Teleprinters Limited (HTL), Chennai and others,[2] the petition was brought before the court to make a company liable for the ex-gratia amount which they have not given to their employees. The contention here is that initially HTL was the public sector organization but later on the government disinvested its share and it ceased to be a public undertaking. The challenge rose before the court was whether the writ of mandamus can be initiated against a private sector. The court held that since at the time of filing the writ petition the company was neither a public undertaking nor functioning under the government authority and hence it did not hold the company liable.

The court in several cases reiterated the fact that the petition related to contractual matter dealing entirely with the private sector will not be entertained in the court of law. The court contended that matters relating to private contract should be dealt in civil court and the high court or supreme court do not have jurisdiction to deal with the said cases. The jury further added that the High Court can invoke its writ jurisdiction when public law remedy is involved.

Impact of LPG Policy

In 1991 with the emergence of Liberalization, Privatization and Globalization (LPG) policy, the huge divide between public and private sector started diminishing. Increasing demand for the lucrative goods of private sector increased their power in the market. And the continuous dereliction of the state control is resulting in the distribution of power in the private sector. With the growth of the private sector, there is an increase in the power hold by private bodies.

Recognition of rights

With the advancing society, people have started recognizing their rights and the fact that these rights are not only violated by the state but also by the private bodies. To protect and safeguard the rights of an individual in such circumstances horizontal application of fundamental rights is implemented by the constitutional court.

Enforceability of absolute right

There are certain fundamental rights which even the private sector cannot violate and in case of violation of those rights, those sectors could be held liable. Article-15 under part III of the constitution prohibits discrimination on the grounds of sex, caste, race, and any kind of violation of this right punishes both private and public sector equally. Similarly in Article 17, 21, 23 and 24 horizontal application of fundamental is applied.

Concerns related to privacy

Another very important reason why the horizontal application of rights should be applied is the concern of the privacy of an individual because of the advancing technologies. There are various ways by which today’s expanding Private IT sector could easily manipulate the data of individuals. Moreover if in such circumstances actions are not taken by the court against the private sector than it will further encourage these sectors to manipulate data to fulfil their ulterior motive.

In fact Article-21 of the constitution which deals with life and liberty of an individual states that “no person shall be deprived of his or her personal liberty except the procedure established by the law. The modern definition of personal liberty also includes Right to Privacy. The application of Article 21 is not restricted to state only but is also extended to non-state actors, i.e. private sector. Similar to Article 21, Article 19 is also established without restricting only to state. In Vishakha v. State of Rajasthan[3], the court reiterated that the safety of women at workplace is their fundamental right and it should be adopted mandatorily by both public and private sector.

The citizen can surely file a writ petition under Article 32 of the Supreme Court, against the public sector against the act or omission of fundamental rights. However, this right with the citizens is only applicable to the public sector and its applicability in the private sector is limited to only a few cases.

Conclusion

Certain Fundamental rights are not enforceable against private sector even though they yield equal or even more power than the public sector. The court should adopt a mechanism where even the private sector should be held answerable and responsible for their actions. The disproportionate power vested with the private sector give them enormous chances to misuse their power which in some cases infringes the fundamental rights of the citizens. If the court enforces the horizontal application of rights in full form than it the chances of violation of fundamental rights can be greatly reduced.

References

[1] P.D. Shamsadani v. Union Bank of India, AIR 1952 SC 59.

[2] Babu and others v. Managing Director, Hindustan Teleprinters Limited (HTL), Chennai and others, 2013 (3) TMI 339 MADRAS HC.

[3] Vishaka & Ors. v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1997 SC 3011.

Latest Posts

This article is written by Samridhi Sachdeva pursuing BBA LLB from Gitarattan International Business School, GGSIPU. This article talks about the meaning and theories of dissolution of marriage, forms and grounds of divorce under the Hindu law.

Introduction

In Hindu law, the marriage is a sacramental union, where two people take vows and reside together, followed by all the cultures of the Hindu religion. But, sometimes either by the misconduct of any of the partners or by mutual consent of both the partners, the marriage can be dissolved. In early times, the marriages were unbreakable or indissoluble. But with time, as the matrimonial offences became the cause for unhappy marriages, then need was felt to end the unhappy marriages.

Dissolution of marriage is just another form of divorce basically. It can be done in either of the two ways: fault theory and no fault theory. In the fault theory, the marriage is dissolved on the basis of misconduct by one partner. And, in no fault theory, the parties mutually agree to live separately by dissolving the marriage. And, in most cases, the marriage is dissolved due to the no fault theory of dissolution. Further in the article, theories, grounds and forms of divorce are discussed.

Theories

The theories of dissolution of marriage are listed below:

Fault or Guilt theory- In this theory, one of the parties of marriage commits a matrimonial offence. Matrimonial offences like Adultery, Cruelty and Desertion are the main roots that frustrate the marriage. In early times, adultery was the major transgression that led to the dissolution of marriages. Cruelty became a matrimonial offence because it undermines the very purpose of marriage that partners will in harmony and peace together. Desertion destroys the basic assumption that the partners will cohabit with each other. In this guilt theory, there has to be one guilty and one innocent person. This theory lays down that the person who is seeking divorce is the innocent party. The dissolution takes place by punishing the guilty person.
Consent theory- This theory is based on the principle that if the parties can enter into the marriage with their mutual consent, then they can also dissolve the marriage by their mutual consent. Sometimes, the parties may realise that they made a mistake by entering into the marriage and maybe they want to end their marriage by their mutual desire. Or parties may realise that their married life is not happy or on the account of their incompatibility of temperament or because of any other reason by which they can not live together happily. The protagonists of this theory hold that by dissolving the marriage with mutual consent, it will bring out the happy marriages and reduce the number of unhappy marriages. This theory was criticised on the basis, that it leads to chaos in the family and hasty divorces. This theory is also mentioned in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, under section 13B.
Irretrievable Breakdown theory- This theory is the most controversial theory. According to this theory, the marriage unites two persons on the basis of love, affection and respect for each other. And if any of these is destroyed and their marriage has come to an extent where it can be repaired, that is the point when the spouses can not live together with peace and harmony. And then there is no point left to take that marriage further. This theory is presumed de facto. The fact that parties are not living together with or without any reasonable excuse, shows that parties are unwilling to live with each other. This breakdown theory is not a ground for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act and Special Marriages Act. But, Supreme Court in a recent judgement in October 2019, ruled that divorce can be granted if a marriage is totally irreparable and emotionally dead. The facts of the case were that the husband and the wife were living separately from the last 22 years. And his petition for the divorce was rejected by a district court and Andhra Pradesh High Court because the wife did not agree to give consent to dissolve the marriage. The court invoked the powers of Article 142 of the Indian Constitution to grant divorce on the basis of this theory. This will only apply in cases where one of the parties does not agree for the divorce.

Forms of Divorce

The three different forms of divorce are dissolution of marriage, judicial separation and annulment.

1. Dissolution of Marriage – In this, the person desiring for divorce usually end up filing it. This can be done if any party has committed any matrimonial offence, then the innocent party can claim for divorce in the respective court. And, also if both the parties by their mutual consent agree to end the marriage, then by following all the procedures, the parties can be divorced.

2. Judicial Separation– The judicial separation is mentioned in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, under Section 10. It describes that the husband and wife decide to live separately and might not claim for divorce. They may file for judicial separation with divorce or judicial separation, may further lead to divorce. The couples take this step because of some religion or custom by which they do not want to get divorced. So, they can live separately by the order of judicial separation.

3. Annulment– In annulment, the court declares that the marriage never existed. Like, if any marriage occurred at a minor age of any of the partner or if either of the partners is already married to someone else. This annulment is only possible when the marriage was not legal at the very first age. The conditions for a valid marriage are described under section 5 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, under that the conditions like the majority of the age and the spouse should not be married to someone else are violated, then the marriage can be annulled.

Grounds for Divorce

As mentioned in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 under section 13, there are several grounds, on which divorce can be granted. It lays down ground like adultery, cruelty, desertion, conversion, insanity, incurable leprosy, venereal disease, renunciation of the world. Also, there are some grounds on which, the female can alone sue or end the marriage, like husband, since the solemnisation of the marriage, is guilty of rape, sodomy, bestiality, cohabitation not resumed for one year, marriage of the wife took place when she was 15 and repudiated the marriage before she attained the age of 18 years and the husband has married more than one wife before the commencement of this act.

Adultery- This offence, though decriminalised under Indian Penal Code, but is still a ground for divorce. It occurs basically when the respondent comes into voluntary sexual contact with other person, after the solemnisation of the marriage between the respondent and the petitioner. The burden of proof of adultery lies on the petitioner, to prove the adultery by the respondent.
Desertion- It is one of the grounds for divorce or judicial separation. If the respondent runs away for two years then the decree of judicial separation or divorce may be passed by the court by the consent of the parties. Also, if the respondent deserts away for 7 years, then he will be considered as dead and ultimate and obvious divorce decree will pass. If the desertion is done for some reasonable cause, then the respondent can not be held liable. So, there should be no reasonable cause for desertion.
Cruelty- It is the ground of divorce as well as judicial separation. Also, it is one of the most difficult matrimonial crime to define. Cruelty can be both mental and physical. If the acts of the respondent or his family members harm the petitioner, then the divorce can be granted on the basis of cruelty. In India, it is basically done for the demand of dowry, false accusation of adultery or if the partner refuses to have marital intercourse.
Insanity- If the insanity of a person is incurable for more than 2 years, then the divorce may be granted.
Leprosy- Leprosy is given as a ground for divorce as well as for judicial separation. But the duration of leprosy is not defined in the Hindu Marriage Act, it only describes it to be virulent and incurable.
Venereal diseases- The Hindu Marriage Act, lays down this venereal diseases as the ground for divorce and judicial separation and it should be in a communicable form. The duration of the disease is not mentioned. And it is immaterial that the disease is curable or was contracted innocently
Conversion to a Non-Hindu religion– The requirement to get divorce on this ground is that the respondent has ceased to be a Hindu and has converted to another religion. If at the time of marriage, the person was Hindu and ceased to be a Hindu after the marriage, then the decree of divorce will be passed by the competent court.
Renunciation of the World- The respondent should have been known to renounce the world by entering into any religious order and leaving behind his wife and family. Then the divorce will be granted.

Conclusion

In Hindu law, there are various forms of divorce. If the partners in a marriage are not living happily, they can file for divorce or file for judicial separation. The various grounds mentioned above can help to dissolve the unhappy marriages.

This article is written by Ishika Gupta pursuing BBA L.LB from Gitarattan International Business School. This article aims to highlight the fate of freedom of Press in India and the restrictions imposed on it.

“Our liberty depends on the freedom of the Press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.” ~ Thomas Jefferson

Freedom of Press or media means the right to express and communicate thoughts through the means of various media including electronic and print media. This right excludes the interference from any overreaching state.

INTRODUCTION

Lord Mansfield described liberty of Press as the liberty to print and publish whatever one wants to and there is no requirement of prior permission. Not only newspapers and periodicals but also pamphlets, circulars and every sort of publication which involves information and opinion are included in freedom of Press as said in “Sakal Papers Ltd. vs. Union of India”.

It is the duty of the government to distinguish between materials whether it is to be publicised or protected from disclosure to the public. The materials which are to be protected may be sensitive, classified or secret or may be of national importance or the same should not be made public due to national security reasons.

As per Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948, Freedom of opinion and expression is a fundamental right given to everybody and it also includes freedom to hold opinion without any interference and to receive and deliver information and opinions through any form of media. Equal treatment is given to spoken and published expression as the freedom of speech is often covered under the same laws as the freedom of Press. Sweden was the first country to introduce Freedom of Press Act, 1766 and adopted freedom of Press under its constitution.

However, in India, the Fundamental right of freedom of Press is implicit in the right of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19 (1)(A) of the Constitution and it is necessary for political liberty and proper functioning of democracy.

When men cannot freely convey their thoughts to one another, no freedom is secured, where freedom of expression exists the beginning of a free society and means for every retention of liberty are already present. As Dr. Ambedkar in his speech said that the Press has no special rights which are not to be given or which are not to be exercised by the citizen in his individual capacity. The Editor of a Press or Manager is merely exercising the right of expression and therefore no special mention is necessary of the freedom of the Press.

HISTORY

Indian Press has a long history right from the time of British rule in the country. The British Government enacted a number of legislations like the Indian Press Act, 1910, Indian Press Emergency Act in 1931-32 to control the Press. However, after the enactment of the Constitution of India, there was a change in the situation. The Preamble of the Indian Constitution guaranteed the freedom of expression to all its citizen and the freedom of Press has been included as a part of freedom of speech and expression under Article 19.

In Indian Express Newspaper vs. Union of India, the Court observed that the expression “freedom of Press” has impliedly covered under Article 19(1)(A) of the Constitution of India. It means freedom from the interference of any authority which would have an effect upon content and circulation of the newspaper. Nobody could intervene in the freedom of Press in the name of public interest.

In “Romesh Thapar vs. State of Madras”, a law banning entry and circulation of the journal in a State was held to be invalid. The Court held that there can be no doubt that freedom of speech and expression includes freedom of propagation of ideas and that freedom is ensured by circulation. Freedom of circulation is as essential as freedom of publication.

Freedom of Press has three essential elements namely:

a) Freedom of access to all sources of information.

b) Freedom of publication and

c) Freedom of circulation.

In “Prabha Dutt vs. Union of India”, the Supreme Court allowed the representatives of a few newspapers to interview Billa and Ranga, the death sentence convicts, as they wanted to be interviewed.

However, in India, Press has not been able to practice its freedom to express the view completely as there are various instances when the freedom of Press has been suppressed by the legislature. In case of “Brij Bhushan vs. State of Delhi” and “Virender vs. State of Punjab” prohibition of newspapers from publishing its own views or view of correspondents about a topic has been held to be a serious encroachment on the freedom of speech and expression.

In “Sakal Papers Ltd. vs. Union of India”, the Daily Newspapers Order, 1960, which fixed the number of pages and size of newspapers was held to be violative of freedom of Press and not a reasonable restriction under Article 19(2).

RESTRICTIONS

The Indian Constitution does not mention the word “Press” expressly under the right to freedom of speech and expression. Hence, it is included under general fundamental rights given under Article 19 and therefore, is subject to restrictions under Article 19(2).

Clause (2) of Article 19 of Indian Constitution, enables the legislature to impose certain restrictions on free speech under following heads:

1) Sovereignty and integrity of India: This ground was added to Clause (2) of Article 19 by the 16^th Amendment. Under this Clause freedom of speech and expression can be restricted so as not to permit to anyone to challenge the integrity and sovereignty of India or to preach cession of any part of India from the Union.

Sedition: Sedition embraces all those practices whether by word, or writing which is calculated to disturb the tranquillity of the state and lead ignorant persons to subvert the Govt. Sedition is not mentioned anywhere under Article 19 (2) as a ground of restriction on freedom of speech and expression. But it has been held in “Devi Saren vs. State” that sections 124A and 153A of Indian Penal Code impose reasonable restrictions in the interest of public order and is saved by Article 19 (2).

2) Security of the State: In the interest of security of the State, reasonable restrictions can be imposed on freedom of speech and expression. In “Romesh Thapar vs. State of Madras”, the Supreme Court said that there are different types of offences against public order but not every public disorder amounts to a threat to the security of the state. The term security of the State applies only to higher grades of public disorder like rebellion, waging war etc.

3) Friendly relations with Foreign States: By the first amendment, this provision was added with the objective to prohibit unrestrained malicious propaganda against a foreign-friendly State which may jeopardise the maintenance of good relations between India and that State.

4) Public Order: The Supreme Court said that public order denotes that state of tranquillity which prevails among the members of political society as a result of internal regulations enforced by the government. The public order also includes public safety and public safety means the safety of the community from external and internal dangers. In “Central Prison vs. Ram Manohar Lohia”, the Court rejected the arguments that the instigation of a single individual not to pay tax would itself destroy public order.

5) Decency or morality: A publication is indecent or immoral, if it tends to produce negative thoughts and corrupt minds of those who are opened to such immoral influences and into whose hands, a publication of this sort is likely to fall. Section 292 to 294 of the Indian Penal Code provide instances of restrictions on the freedom of speech and expression on the ground of decency or morality.

6) Contempt of Court: If the freedom exceeds the reasonable and fair limit and amounts to contempt of Court, the restrictions can be imposed. The contempt of Court can be either of two types, civil contempt and criminal contempt.

7) Defamation: A statement which injures a person’s reputation amounts to defamation. Section 499 of Indian Penal Code lays down the punishment related to defamation. In Auto Shankar Case i.e. “R. Rajagopal vs. State of Tamil Nadu”, the Supreme Court held that no authority can impose a prior restriction upon the publication of defamatory material against its officials.

8) Incitement to an offence: This ground was added by the first amendment. Offence shall mean any act or omission made punishable by law and freedom of speech and expression cannot confer a licence to incite people to commit offence.

Despite all this suppression, difficulties, restrictions the press has managed to achieve a lot of success and fame. It has been a long journey but the press has proved itself useful every time.

As in the case of Jessica Lal i.e. “Manu Sharma v State of Delhi”, Jessica was killed by Manu Sharma the son of Haryana minister Venod Sharma as she refused to serve him liquor in the restaurant. The case could not get success at that time due to lack of evidence but it got reopened due to media and public outcry. Organisations like Tehlka and NDTV have been particularly influential and made Venod Sharma resign.

Similarly, in Priyadarshini Mattoo’s Case, the victim was a law student and got raped and murdered by Santosh Kumar her colleague as she refused his proposal. Santosh Kumar was the son of an IPS officer and the case finally got judgement after a long trial due to the significant role played by the media.

CONCLUSION

Freedom of press is essential for the proper functioning of the democratic process. Democracy means Government of the people, by the people and for the people; it is obvious that every citizen must be entitled to participate in the democratic process and in order to enable him to intelligently exercise his right of making a choice, free and general discussion of public matters is absolutely essential. This explains the constitutional viewpoint of the freedom of press in India. It has been sixty years since India became Republic & commencement of the Constitution there is been a lot of ups & downs in our democracy & the press also has come across age.

Thus, we can conclude that the time has come for the press of the largest democracy of the world to work with hand-in-hand with the judiciary for the welfare of its subjects. The day is not far away when there will be no eclipse of injustice & the sun of justice will shine brightly forever.

Latest Posts

Archives

ABOUT US:

Lexpeeps is totally dedicated to the legal fraternity law professionals get an opportunity to flourish their career in a better way. Lexpeeps organises various events like debates, seminars of its own and also organises the major law school activities on tie-ups with leading law school. Lexpeeps is not only limited to managing the legal events but it also provides internships to law students where the law professionals come in touch with each other and grow by associating with the company.
Lexpeeps is also focussing on several social works like providing information and free legal aid to the poorer section of society.

ABOUT THE EVENT:

Lexpeeps.in is organising a live workshop on “Moot Court Challenges: How to Overcome”. Students will learn how to prepare award-winning memorial and how to argue in the moot courts. It will enable the students to master the overall mooting skills in order to make them perform better.

EXPERT GUESTS:

Advocate Jayant Bhatt (Senior Advocate Supreme Court)
Advocate Alok vajpeyi (Associate Singhania & Company ,Mumbai)

Student Speaker:

Siddhant Ahuja (Ram Manohar Lohiya National Law University)-Winner of DR.R K Tankha International Moot and many other moots

Moderator:

Madhur Rathaur (Founder, Director -lexpeeps)

Date and Time:

JUNE 5,2020 4:30-5:30 P.M.

Registration Procedure:

Registration Fee: Totally Free

Registration Link:

https://forms.gle/ax11qRehbLpYw4Lu5

*Link to join the webinar will be sent through mail after a successful registration

Perks: Free E Certificate

Limited Seats Hurry UP (First Come First Serve Basis)

Contact Us:

Email: lexpeeps.in@gmail.com

Whatsapp:8340132731

For Queries Contact:

SHASHVAT(Convenor):7088183277

Nidhi: 9729793238

Brochure Download