Case Archive

Navtej Singh Johar v UOI; Akkai Padmashali v UOI

On September 6th 2018 a five-judge Bench unanimously struck down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, to the extent that it criminalised same-sex relations between consenting adults.

Tehseen Poonawalla v UOI

In July 17th 2018, the SC issued guidelines to curb acts of cow vigilantism. However, it did not address questions on the constitutional validity of immunity provisions for cow vigilantes.

Romila Thapar v Union of India

The Court evaluated the arrests of five human rights activists under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) by the Maharashtra Police and allowed the investigation to continue. The Police accused the activists of involvement in the Bhima Koregaon violence and sedition.

Indian Young Lawyers’ Association v State of Kerala

The Supreme Court declared unconstitutional the Sabarimala Temple's custom of prohibiting women in their 'menstruating years' from entering.

Government of NCT of Delhi v Union of India

The Court judged that the Chief Minister and not the Lieutenant Governor (LG) is the executive head of the National Capital Territory (NCT) government. Hence, the LG is bound by the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers on all matters where the Delhi Assembly has to the power to make laws.

Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v Union of India

A 4:1 majority upheld the Aadhaar (Targeted Delivery of Financial and Other Subsidies, Benefits and Services) Act, 2016 as constitutional, however, it struck down individual sections of the Act as unconstitutional.

Kalpana Mehta v Union of India

The Court held that there can be limited reliance placed on a Parliamentary Standing Committee Report during judicial proceedings.

State of Gujarat v Islamic Relief Committee of Gujarat

The Court held that diversion of tax proceeds for restoring religious shrines destroyed even due to State's negligence violates the principles of Secularism. The court underlined a conception of Secularism based on Strict Separation principle. Additionally, the court further hinted that compensation can be sought only for violation of Right to Life and not for other fundamental rights.