Yogesh and Ram Bajad Advocate & Associates

Knocked the Supreme Court to advance gender justice: President President Ramnath Kovind referred to the reference to the two-decade-old Visakha Guidelines implemented to prevent sexual harassment of women at the workplace. He also referred to the recent directive to give permanent commission and command posting to women officers in the army. President Ram Nath Kovind on Sunday praised the efforts of the Indian judiciary to move ahead on the goal of gender justice and said that the Supreme Court has always been active and progressive. At the International Judicial Conference 2020 on 'Judiciary and the Changing World', the President said that the apex court has led progressive social change. He referred to the reference to the two-decade-old Visakha guidelines implemented to prevent sexual harassment of women at the workplace. He also referred to the recent instructions to give permanent commission and command post to women officers in the army. Kovind said- If you

A fundamental rule of our legal framework is that a judge or justice must not sit on a case where the individual is one-sided. This is significant so equity is done and so that equity is seen to be done. There are well established tests for genuine and apprehended legal bias however how these are applied can differ depending upon the accurate circumstance.  Some unfair/biased conduct in indian court by judges can be- Actual legal bias Real bias exists where a judge can be demonstrated to be so dedicated to a specific result that proof and arguments presented won't change that result. A judge must not manage a case where the person is one-sided against or in favour of one of the parties. Apprehended legal bias Apprehended bias exists where an honest layperson may sensibly believe that the judge probably won't manage the issue impartially. The test is whether there is a genuine chance (not a distant chance) of bias. It shouldn't be set up that the judge would

7 historical decisions of the Supreme Court The Supreme Court has taken several landmark decisions this year. In the last one month, four such big decisions have been taken which have brought relief to the citizens of the country. All these decisions have not only ensured justice but have also ruled on issues which the larger section of the society has refused to accept and accept. In the coming years in the country, these decisions will also prove to be very important to bring about a better change. Let us tell you about those seven big and historical decisions- First decision- Section 377 to be excluded from the category of crime On September 6, the constitutional bench of the Supreme Court took a major decision on Section 377 of the Law on Homosexuality and excluded it from the category of crime. That is, homosexual sex between two adults by consent was excluded from the scope of the offense by one vote. The court termed a part of Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code,

Supreme Court verdict on reservation: There was a fierce commotion in Lok Sabha, know which party said in the House The government on Monday made it clear that it is committed to reservation for SC and ST, amid allegations of being anti-Dalit by opposition parties over a Supreme Court ruling on reservation in appointments and promotions. In his statement in the Lok Sabha on the issue, Social Justice and Empowerment Minister Thawar Chand Gehlot said, "The central government is not a party to this issue and this decision is being considered at a high level." He said that no affidavit was sought from the Government of India regarding this decision, the Government of India will take the right steps. Gehlot said, "We are committed and dedicated to reservation." He said that this is the case of 2012 when the Congress government was in Uttarakhand. The minister also said that the government will consider this issue in a holistic manner. On this, the members of the Congre

Your right is to register an FIR, know what is the difference between FIR and NCR It is often heard that 'Police is not registering First Information Report (FIR)'. In such a situation, many times the victim has to go to the police station, then many times have to give up and decide not to file an FIR. This is all because people do not know about their rights to register an FIR. Under the law, the police cannot refuse to register an FIR. It is also mentioned in section 154 of CRPC. Crimes in India are divided into two categories. The first is cognizable offence and the second is non cognizable offence. Serious crime The police do not require a warrant for arrest in a cognizable offense. These are serious crimes in which the police have to take immediate action. These do not require the magistrate to order the police to initiate an investigation. These include cases such as rape, murder, illegal confinement, damage to public property and taking bribe by public serva

SC / ST Act amendment 2018 upheld by Supreme Court, arrest of accused will be done immediately by filing FIR On 20 March 2018, in view of the misuse of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, the Supreme Court automatically stayed the FIR and arrests on complaints received under this Act. The Supreme Court on Monday upheld the government's 2018 amendment to the SC / ST Act, giving relief to the central government. The Supreme Court said that preliminary inquiry is not necessary if a complaint is made under the Atrocities Act. Permission from senior police officers or the appointing authority is not necessary before filing an FIR. No provision for anticipatory bail in cases of SC / ST Act. Courts can quash the FIR in exceptional circumstances. The Supreme Court dismissed the petitions challenging the validity of the SC / ST Amendment Act, 2018. According to the SC / ST Amendment Act, now an FIR will be registered immediately after