Canonsphere

CSINv3
Menu
Submit a Manuscript
Category

Case Comments

Category
Archive

CASE COMMENTARY: AJAY KUMAR SUNIL KUMAR SHARMA VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA (2013) SCC ONLINE BOM 359

This case commentary is written by Vivek, a final-year law student at Dr. D.Y. Patil College of Law. He is passionate about law and various branches of law and has a continuous knack for the same.

ABSTRACT

“Case Commentary: Ajaykumar Sunil Kumar Sharma vs. The State of Maharashtra” provides an in-depth analysis of this significant legal case. This blog will include a detailed examination of the facts, legal arguments, and the court’s judgment. It will also discuss the implications of the verdict and its impact on the legal landscape. By exploring these elements, the commentary aims to offer a comprehensive understanding of the case and its relevance to contemporary legal issues.

Powered By EmbedPress

by
Keep Reading
Archive

CASE COMMENTARY: ARUNA RAMACHANDRA SHANBAUG V. UNION OF INDIA & ORS., (2011) 4 SCC 454

This case commentary is written by Bhavneet, A fifth-year law student at Chandigarh University. She is passionate about law and has written various blogs and articles which have helped widen her knowledge.

ABSTRACT

“Case Commentary: Aruna Shanbaug” provides a detailed analysis of the landmark Supreme Court case, Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug vs. Union of India. This blog will include an examination of the facts, legal arguments, and the court’s judgment, which distinguished between active and passive euthanasia and established guidelines for the latter in exceptional circumstances. The commentary will also discuss the broader implications of the case on end-of-life decisions and the right to die with dignity in India.

Powered By EmbedPress

by
Keep Reading
Archive

CASE COMMENTARY: KM NANAVATI V. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AIR 1962 SC 605.

This case commentary is written by Kunda Mulenga, a 3rd-year law student at the University of Zambia. She is a passionate law student who aims to learn and explore laws around the globe.

ABSTRACT

The case K. M Nanavati vs. State of Maharashtra raised pivotal questions about the interpretation of murder versus culpable homicide not amounting to murder, the right to a fair trial, and the role of societal biases in judicial outcomes. Initially tried by a jury, Nanavati was acquitted amidst significant public sympathy. However, the Bombay High Court set aside the jury’s verdict, citing legal errors and societal influences, and convicted Nanavati under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code. This case is historically significant as it marked the abolition of the jury system in India, highlighting its susceptibility to emotional and public influence. It also showcased the intersection of media, public sentiment, and the judicial process in post-colonial India.

Powered By EmbedPress

by
Keep Reading
Archive

CASE COMMENTARY: SHREYA SINGHAL VS. UNION OF INDIA, AIR 2015 SC 1523

This case commentary is written by Atiya Sanjida, a 4th-year student at the University of Calcutta. She is a detail-oriented law student who specializes in Legal Drafting.

ABSTRACT

“Case Analysis: Shreya Singhal vs. Union of India” examines the landmark Supreme Court judgment that invalidated Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. This blog will include a detailed examination of the facts, legal arguments, and the court’s ruling, which emphasized the importance of free speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution2. The case commentary will also discuss the broader implications of this decision on internet freedom and legal precedents in India.

Powered By EmbedPress

by
Keep Reading
Archive

CASE COMMENTARY: SUPRIYO @ SUPRIYA CHAKRABORTY & ANR. V. UNION OF INDIA, AIR 2008 SC 582

This case commentary is written by Bhavneet, A fifth-year law student at Chandigarh University. She is passionate about law and has written various blogs and articles which have helped widen her knowledge.

ABSTRACT

The case Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty & Anr. v. Union of India (2023) was a landmark judgment concerning the recognition of same-sex marriages in India. The petitioners, Supriyo Chakraborty and Abhay Dang, along with other petitioners, sought legal recognition of their same-sex unions under various marriage laws, including the Special Marriage Act, of 1954, and the Hindu Marriage Act, of 1955. The case highlighted critical issues of equality, dignity, and the right to marry under Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Indian Constitution.

Powered By EmbedPress

by
Keep Reading
Case Comments

CASE ANALYSIS: SHREYA SINGHAL VS. UNION OF INDIA OF INDIA, AIR 2015 SC 1523

This case commentary is written by Atiya Sanjida, a 4th year student of University of Calcutta. She is a detailed oriented law student who is specialised in Legal Drafting.

ABSTRACT

“Case Analysis: Shreya Singhal vs. Union of India” examines the landmark Supreme Court judgment that invalidated Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000. This blog will include a detailed examination of the facts, legal arguments, and the court’s ruling, which emphasized the importance of free speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution2. The case commentary will also discuss the broader implications of this
decision on internet freedom and legal precedents in India.

Case-Shreya-Singhal-VS-UOI.docxDownload
by
Keep Reading
Archive

Case Commentary: Ajay Kumar Sunil Kumar Sharma vs. The State of Maharashtra

This case commentary is written by Vivek, a final year law student at Dr. D.Y. Patil College of Law. He is passionate about law and various branches of law and has a continuous knack for the same.

ABSTRACT

Case Commentary: Ajaykumar Sunil Kumar Sharma vs. The State of Maharashtra” provides an in-depth analysis of this significant legal case. This blog will include a detailed examination of the facts, legal arguments, and the court’s judgment. It will also discuss the implications of the verdict and its impact on the legal landscape. By exploring these elements, the commentary aims to offer a comprehensive understanding of the case and its relevance to contemporary legal issues.

Case-Ajaykumar-Sunilkumar-Sharma-Vs.-State-of-Maharashtra-2013-SCC-OnLine-Bom-359.docxDownload
by
Keep Reading
Case Comments

CASE COMMENTARY ON ARUNA SHANBAUG

This case commentary is written by Bhavneet, A fifth year law student of Chandigarh University. She is passionate for law and has written various blogs and articles which has helped widen her knowledge.

ABSTRACT

Case Commentary: Aruna Shanbaug” provides a detailed analysis of the landmark Supreme Court case, Aruna Ramchandra Shanbaug vs. Union of India. This blog will include an examination of the facts, legal arguments, and the court’s judgment, which distinguished between active and passive euthanasia and established guidelines for the latter in exceptional circumstances. The commentary will also discuss the broader implications of the case on end-of-life decisions and the right to die with dignity in India.

Powered By EmbedPress

by
Keep Reading