Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 61 (5.02 seconds)
P.S.Deepthi vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 22 March, 2019 cites

State Of Jammu & Kashmir vs Triloki Nath Khosa & Ors on 26 September, 1973

Our approach to the equal protection clause must, 64 therefore, be guided by the words of caution uttered by Krishna Iyer, J. in State of Jammu & Kashmir v. Triloki Nath Khosa: (at SCC p.42) "Mini-classifications based on micro-distinctions are false to our egalitarian faith and only substantial and straightforward classifications plainly promoting relevant goals can have constitutional validity. To overdo classification is to undo equality."
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 2535 - V R Iyer - Full Document

Shayara Bano vs Union Of India And Ors. Ministry Of Women ... on 22 August, 2017

In so far as manifest arbitrariness is concerned, it is important to advert to the majority judgment of this Court in Shayara Bano v. Union of India and others, (2017) 9 SCC 1. The majority, in an exhaustive review of case law under Article 14, which dealt with legislation being struck down on the ground that it is manifestly arbitrary, has observed:
Supreme Court of India Cites 225 - Cited by 2604 - J S Khehar - Full Document

Mohammad Shujat, Ali & Ors. Etc vs Union Of India & Ors. Etc on 3 May, 1974

(iv) In Mohd. Shujat Ali vs. Union of India, reported in 1975 (3) SCC 76, the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that, Article 14 ensures to every person equality before law and equal protection of the laws. However, the constitutional code of equality and equal opportunity does not mean that the same laws must be applicable to all persons. It does not compel the State to run "all its laws in the channels of general legislation". It recognises that having regard to differences and disparities which exist among men and things, they cannot all be treated alike by the application of the same laws.
Supreme Court of India Cites 16 - Cited by 296 - P N Bhagwati - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 Next