Download PDF From Here: www.pw.live/study/batches/samagra-book-series-batch--hinglish--902582/batch-overview 📳For Free Notes Quizzes and Tests - t.me/pw_upsc
Good evening sir 1:25 when supreme court was established the governor general of Bengal was Warren Hastings. 2:14 in supreme court with 1 chief justice there was 2 judges . 1:06:14 in parliament the quorum represent 10% of total members of the parliament. 1:25:13 A K Ayyer was the member of drafting committee. 2:23:37 case between FR and DPSP is Golaknath vs state of punjab.
Doctrine of Severability About: It is also known as the doctrine of separability and protects the Fundamental Rights of the citizens. As per clause (1) of the Article 13 of the Constitution, if any of the laws enforced in India are inconsistent with the provisions of fundamental rights, they shall, to the extent of that inconsistency, be void. The whole law/act would not be held invalid, but only the provisions which are not in consistency with the Fundamental rights. Limitation: If the valid and invalid part are so closely mixed up with each other that it cannot be separated then the whole law or act will be held invalid.
The case of ADM Jabalpur vs Shivkant Shukla, also known as the ' Habeas Corpus' case, is also a prime example of how positive law principles can override individual rights in exceptional circumstances
in ADM JABALPUR CASE; Only Justice H.R. Khanna stood against the jury’s decision in the ADM Jabalpur Case. He said that no one should be deprived of liberty and life. He stated that the right to enquire about the matter and the Habeas Corpus writ could not be denied
Composition of NJAC: The Chief Justice of India as the ex officio Chairperson Two senior-most Supreme Court Judges as ex officio members The Union Minister of Law and Justice as ex officio member Two eminent persons from civil society (to be nominated by a committee consisting of the Chief Justice of India, Prime Minister of India and the Leader of Opposition in the Lok Sabha; one of the eminent persons to be nominated from SC/ST/OBC/minorities or women)
In August 2014, Parliament passed the Constitution (99th Amendment) Act, 2014 along with the NJAC Act, 2014, providing for the creation of an independent commission to appoint judges to the Supreme Court and high courts to replace the collegium system. In 2015, the Supreme Court declared both the 99th Constitutional Amendment, 2014 and the NJAC Act, 2014 as unconstitutional and null and void.
Govt of India Act 1935 - Federal Court A federal court was established at Delhi for the resolution of disputes between provinces and also between the centre and the provinces. It was to have 1 Chief Justice and not more than 6 judges.
Rule Against Bias, Rule of Fair Hearing, and Reasoned Decision. These principles ensure that decision-makers are impartial. Also, these principle make sure that all the parties have an opportunity to present their case, and decisions are based on reasoning.
NJAC's Act may be amended to include safeguards that would make it constitutionally valid, as well as reorganised to ensure that majority control remains with the judiciary.
Balance Between Independence and Accountability: The real issue is not who (judiciary or executive) appoints the judges, but the manner in which they are appointed. For that, whatever may be the composition of the Judicial Appointment Commission (JAC), it is important to strike a balance between judicial independence and judicial accountability. The Executive should have a say in appointments but the composition of the JAC should be such that it does not result in compromising judicial independence
Chief Justice is the master of the roster in this role he alone has the prerogative to constitute benches of the court and allocated cases to the benches so constituted.
If the parliament passed the requirement of removing a judge then y chairman has given the power to reject their opinion..? Anyone can pls elaborate this
1:39:44 PAR APNE GALAT SAMJAYA HA phela point ha jab lower court kisi ko acquittal kar deh means inoccent and high court case ko apne pass lehkar judgment ko reverse kar deh aur death sentence deh de
Consider the following statements: (2019) The 44th Amendment to the Constitution of India introduced an Article placing the election of the Prime Minister beyond judicial review. The Supreme Court of India struck down the 99th Amendment to the Constitution of India as being violative of the independence of judiciary. Which of the statements given above is/are correct? (a) 1 only (b) 2 only (c) Both 1 and 2 (d) Neither 1 nor 2 Ans: (b)
What is the Collegium System? The Supreme Court Collegium is a five-member body, which is headed by the incumbent Chief Justice of India (CJI) and comprises the four other senior most judges of the court at that time. A High Court collegium is led by the incumbent Chief Justice and two other senior most judges of that court. The government can also raise objections and seek clarifications regarding the collegium’s choices, but if the collegium reiterates the same names, the government is bound to appoint them as judges
justice Inside Judiciary: Care must be taken to ensure that the institutional imperative of the Court for dispensing justice is maintained inside the judiciary with equality of opportunity and fixed criteria for selection of judges.
Doctrine of Eclipse About: It is applied when any law/act violates the Fundamental Rights (FR). In such a case, the FR overshadows the law/act and makes it unenforceable but not void ab initio (Having no legal effect from inception). They can be reinforced if the restrictions posed by the fundamental rights are removed. It is only against the citizens that these laws/acts remain in a dormant condition but remain in operation as against non-citizens who are not entitled to fundamental rights. Constitutional Provisions: Doctrine of eclipse is contained in Article 13(1) of the Indian Constitution. The doctrine of eclipse does not apply to post-constitutional laws.
Question: The ADM Jabalpur Case was related to which period in Indian history? a) Independence struggle b) Emergency era c) Post-independence economic reforms d) Constitutional drafting phase Answer: b) Emergency era
Question: The ADM Jabalpur Case pertains to which of the following? a) Freedom of speech and expression b) Right to privacy c) Protection against unlawful detention d) Right to equality Answer: c) Protection against unlawful detention
Question: The significance of the ADM Jabalpur Case lies in its impact on which aspect of Indian constitutional history? a) Interpretation of the right to property b) Protection of minority rights c) Preservation of fundamental rights during emergencies d) Establishment of the judicial review power Answer: c) Preservation of fundamental rights during emergencies
ADM Jabalpur Case directly contradicted the Fundamental Rights of the Indian citizens under the Constitution of India. The High Courts, and especially Justice Hans Raj Khanna, dissented against the case. However, then the justice, P.N. Bhagwati, still concluded the ADM Jabalpur Case in favour of the Indira Gandhi government
ADM Jabalpur Case - Background ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla case. When Indira Gandhi’s win in Lok Sabha was challenged by the Ahmedabad High Court, Justice Sinha accused her of indulging in fraudulent activities to win the elections, barring her from elections for the next six years. The events that happened next make up the details of the ADM Jabalpur Case: Indira Gandhi took the case to the Supreme Court, which only granted a conditional stay. As a result, she imposed an Emergency in the country on 26th June 1975. Political opponents, including A.B. Vajpayee and Morarji Desai, were arrested under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act (MISA), allowing no trial. They challenged the detention in High Courts and got support as well. The government again approached the Supreme Court to silence the High Courts in the ADM Jabalpur vs Shivkant Shukla case.
*Sir 👉 lkin Babri masjid ka faisla to compromise krke dya ,,, sarkar trf se un svi judge ko bde - bde hote se sammanit kya gya ,,, retirement hone ke bad jisne babri masjid ka faisla dya ,,, fr hmhre judiciary kha independence h* ...😮😮
Because both India and USA were colonies for a long time. The polity of India and USA are totally opposite, for say MLAs from any state in India depends on population but in USA there are 2 Senates from each province. Also our minds are convenient with USA, we understand better if the comparison is between our knowing things. Also answer me that do you know Africa better or USA? even though Africa was a British colony but USA was a French colony.. Teacher's end goal is to make you understand.
There are mainly two Principles of Natural Justice. These two Principles are: ‘Nemo judex in causa sua’. No one should be made a judge in his own cause, and the rule against bias. ‘Audi alteram partem’ means to hear the other party, or no one should be condemned unheard.
In the A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras (1950) case, the Supreme Court interpreted the Fundamental Rights under Part III of Indian Constitution. In this case, it held that the protection under Article 21 is available only against arbitrary executive action and not from arbitrary legislative action. This means that the State can deprive the right to life and personal liberty of a person based on a law. This is because of the expression ‘procedure established by law’ in Article 21, which is different from the expression ‘due process of law’ contained in the American Constitution. Hence, the validity of a law that has prescribed a procedure cannot be questioned on the ground that the law is unreasonable, unfair, or unjust. Secondly, the Supreme Court held that ‘personal liberty’ means only liberty relating to the person or body of the individual.
We are not interested to know that person birthday jisne bhagat singh jaise logo ki baali chada di your favorite you marriage your daughter and mother from gandhi
