Karnataka HC Notices Sri Lankan Judge's Rights Plea
07 Mar 2026
Karnataka Proposes Social Media Ban for Under-16s
07 Mar 2026
Justice Dharmadhikari Sworn In as 55th Madras HC Chief Justice
07 Mar 2026
Punjab HC Acquits Ram Rahim in Journalist Murder
07 Mar 2026
Appellate Courts Can Rely on Unexhibited Public Documents Produced by Plaintiff: Gujarat High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Under Section 100 CPC
07 Mar 2026
Punjab & Haryana HC Denies Anticipatory Bail in Murder via Humiliation Case: Sections 103(1) & 3(5) BNS
07 Mar 2026
Security Deposit Forfeiture Without Show-Cause Notice Violates Natural Justice: Himachal Pradesh High Court
07 Mar 2026
S.202 CrPC Inquiry Not Mandatory for Public Servant Complaints If Accused Outside Jurisdiction: Supreme Court
09 Mar 2026
Professor MP Singh: Shaper of Constitutional Discourse
09 Mar 2026
ARUN MISHRA, VINEET SARAN
Federation of Obstetrics and Gynecological Societies of India (FOGSI) – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
Arun Mishra, J.
The instant writ petition has been filed by the Federation of Obstetrics and Gynaecological Societies of India (FOGSI) (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society') highlighting the issues and problems affecting the practice of obstetricians and gynaecologists across the country under the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and challenging the constitutional validity of Sections 23(1) and 23(2) of the Act and seeking direction in the nature of certiorari/mandamus for decriminalising anomalies in paperwork/record keeping/clerical errors in regard of the provisions of the Act for being violative of Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution of India. The Society is the apex body of obstetricians and gynaecologists of the country and is concerned for the welfare of its members.
2. The case set up on behalf of the petitioner-Society is that the Ac
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
Arun Bhandari v. State of U.P.
-
Read summaryCentre for Enquiry into Health & Allied Themes (CEHAT) v. Union of India
-
Read summarySuo Motu v. State of Gujarat
-
Read summaryUttar Pradesh Power Corporation Ltd. v. Ayodhya Prasad Mishra
-
Read summaryVoluntary Health Association of Punjab v. Union of India
-
Read summaryCentre for Enquiry into Health and Allied Themes (CEHAT) v. Union of India
-
Read summaryVoluntary Health Association of Punjab v. Union of India
-
Read summaryNamit Sharma v. Union of India
-
Read summaryHamdard Dawakhana v. The Union of India
-
Read summaryDr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan v. State of Maharashtra
-
Read summaryGian Kaur v. State of Punjab
-
Read summarySubramanian Swamy v. Union of India
-
Read summaryShreya Singhal v. Union of India
-
Read summaryNikesh Tarachand Shah v. Union of India
-
Read summaryP. Rathinam v. Union of India
-
Read summaryState of Uttar Pradesh v. Wasif Haider
-
Read summary
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.