K. Uma Devi v. Government of Tamil Nadu: Maternity Benefits, Reproductive Dignity, and the Limits of the Two-Child Norm Author: SUNKARI VAISHNAVIStudent, PG COLLEGE OF LAW HYDERABAD ——————————————————————————————– 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. K. Uma Devi v. Government of Tamil Nadu reaffirmed that maternity benefits are not a mere statutory concession but are closely tied
X v. Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department: Reproductive Autonomy, Equality, and Abortion Rights Beyond Marriage Author: Kartik m KhanaganniStudent, R.L.Law College, Belagavi ———————————————————————————- 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. X v. Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare Department affirmed that unmarried women are entitled to seek termination of pregnancy under the Medical Termination of
Harish Rana v. Union of India (2026): Operationalising the Right to Die with Dignity under Article 21 .Author: Hiba IliyasStudent, UNiversity of Lucknow, Lucknow —————————————————————— 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. The Supreme Court recognised Clinically Assisted Nutrition and Hydration (CANH) as withdrawable medical treatment rather than basic care.2. The judgment transformed the constitutional right to
S.R. Bommai v. Union of India: Federalism, Secularism, and the Constitutional Limits of Article 356 Author: Sanvi OliStudent, IMS Unison University, Dehradun ——————————————————————————— 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. S.R. Bommai v. Union of India transformed the constitutional understanding of Article 356 by subjecting Presidential Proclamations to judicial review and limiting the arbitrary use of President’s
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan: Judicial Recognition of Workplace Sexual Harassment as a Constitutional Wrong Author: Aditi Singh PariharStudent, Shambhunath Institute of Law, Prayagraj ————————————————————————————– 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan recognised workplace sexual harassment as a violation of women’s fundamental rights under Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the
Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co.: Unilateral Offers, Acceptance by Performance, and the Binding Force of Advertisements Author: Amandeep KaurStudent, University of Nicosia, Nicosia ———————————————————————————— 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. is a landmark contract law case establishing that an advertisement can amount to a binding unilateral offer when it
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala: The Basic Structure Doctrine and the Limits of Constitutional Amendment Author: Natasha NayakStudent, KIIT School Of Law, Bhubaneswar —————————————————————————————— 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala is the landmark judgment in which the Supreme Court evolved the Basic Structure Doctrine to limit Parliament’s amending power
Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India: Polluter Pays, Absolute Liability, and the Constitutionalisation of Environmental Protection Author: Aayushi ChaudharyStudent, Asian Law College, Noida ————————————————————— 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India is a landmark environmental law judgment in which the Supreme Court firmly applied the
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India: Decriminalisation, Constitutional Morality, and the Reclaiming of Dignity Author: Hitesh BhootraStudent, Aishwarya College of Education (Law) —————————————————————————————— 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India partially struck down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code to decriminalise consensual same-sex relations between adults.2. The Supreme
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India: Constitutional Morality, Dignity, and the Decriminalisation of Same-Sex Relations Author: Bhavya SumanStudent, Llyod law college ———————————————————– 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India partially struck down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code by decriminalising consensual same-sex relations between adults in private.2. The
