Law of Constitution in India

Constitutional law in India is the body of law that governs the structure, powers, and functions of the Indian government and the fundamental rights and duties of its citizens. The Indian Constitution, adopted on January 26, 1950, is the supreme law of the land and is one of the lengthiest written constitutions in the world. It establishes India as a sovereign, socialist, secular, and democratic republic, guaranteeing justice, equality, and liberty to all its citizens.

Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (1973): This case established the “Basic Structure Doctrine,” which limits the amending power of the Indian Parliament. It stipulates that while the Constitution can be amended, the core principles and framework of the Constitution, including democracy, federalism, and secularism, cannot be altered.
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India (1978): This case expanded the scope of personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. The Supreme Court ruled that the right to travel abroad is an integral part of personal liberty, and any law infringing on this right must satisfy the test of reasonableness.
Minerva Mills Ltd. v. Union of India (1980): This case reaffirmed the supremacy of the Constitution over parliamentary sovereignty. It struck down parts of the 42nd Amendment Act, which had given the Parliament unchecked amending power. The court emphasized the balance of power between the three branches of government.
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997): This case addressed the issue of sexual harassment at the workplace and laid down guidelines to ensure the dignity and safety of working women. It recognized sexual harassment as a violation of fundamental rights and created a legal framework for addressing such complaints.
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India (2018): This judgment decriminalized consensual homosexual acts between adults by striking down Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. It was a significant step towards recognizing the rights and dignity of the LGBTQ+ community.
Sabarimala Temple Case (2018): In this case, the Supreme Court allowed the entry of women of all age groups into the Sabarimala Temple, striking down an age-old tradition that restricted the entry of women of menstruating age. This decision upheld gender equality and freedom of worship.
Ayodhya Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid Case (2019): This historic judgment resolved a long-standing dispute by granting the disputed site to Hindus for the construction of a Ram Temple and providing an alternative 5-acre plot to the Muslim community for a mosque. It underscored the importance of maintaining peace and harmony while addressing sensitive religious issues.

Indian constitutional law continues to evolve as the judiciary interprets and applies its provisions in response to changing societal norms and values. These landmark judgments reflect the dynamic nature of the Indian Constitution and its commitment to upholding the principles of justice, equality, and liberty for all its citizens.

(SLP) Special Leave Petition

In India, the Special Leave Petition (SLP) is a powerful legal remedy enshrined under Article 136 of the Constitution. It allows individuals or entities to seek redressal from the Supreme Court against judgments or orders passed by any lower court, tribunal, or judicial authority. The SLP serves as an extraordinary jurisdiction mechanism, enabling the Supreme Court to intervene in cases involving substantial questions of law, gross injustice, or violation of fundamental rights.

The scope of an SLP is broad but discretionary. It can be filed in civil, criminal, or even administrative matters where aggrieved parties believe that their case warrants the attention of the apex court. However, it is not an appeal but a petition seeking special permission to appeal. The Supreme Court may grant or reject the petition based on its merits, and its decision is final and binding.

Filing an SLP involves meticulous preparation, including drafting a comprehensive petition highlighting the legal grounds for intervention. Key documents such as certified copies of the impugned order, evidence, and relevant statutes must accompany the petition. Strict timelines are prescribed under the Limitation Act, typically within 90 days from the date of the order being challenged.

PIL (Public Interest Litigation)

Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is a powerful legal mechanism in India that allows individuals or organizations to seek judicial intervention for the protection of public rights and welfare. Unlike traditional litigation, PIL enables any citizen to approach the courts on behalf of marginalized groups or the general public when there is a violation of fundamental rights or public interest. This concept was introduced to make justice accessible to all, particularly those who lack resources to fight legal battles.

In India, PILs are primarily filed under Article 32 (Supreme Court) or Article 226 (High Courts) of the Constitution, which empower these courts to issue writs for enforcing fundamental rights. The scope of PIL extends to addressing issues such as environmental concerns, corruption, human rights violations, labor exploitation, and inadequate public services.

One of the unique features of PIL is its relaxed procedural requirements. Courts accept petitions even through informal means like letters or emails if they highlight genuine public grievances. Over the years, landmark PIL cases have led to significant reforms, including measures to protect the environment, improve prison conditions, and uphold transparency in governance.

Writ & Appeal Petition

In India, writs and appeal petitions are vital legal remedies available to citizens under the Constitution and various statutes. Writs are extraordinary legal tools filed before the High Courts under Article 226 or the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution. They are used to address violations of fundamental rights or administrative irregularities. The five types of writs include Habeas Corpus (to seek relief from unlawful detention), Mandamus (to compel public authorities to perform statutory duties), Certiorari (to quash orders of lower courts or tribunals), Prohibition (to prevent judicial or quasi-judicial bodies from exceeding jurisdiction), and Quo Warranto (to challenge unauthorized holding of public office).

Appeal petitions, on the other hand, are statutory remedies enabling individuals to challenge decisions of lower courts or tribunals in higher forums. Appeals can be filed under various laws, such as the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) or the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), depending on the nature of the case. For instance, civil appeals question errors in judgments related to property disputes or contracts, while criminal appeals challenge convictions or sentences.

Both writs and appeals ensure access to justice and uphold the rule of law. While writs provide immediate redress for fundamental rights violations, appeals offer an opportunity to reassess facts and legal interpretations.

Transfer Petition

In India, a Transfer Petition is a legal remedy filed under Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) or Article 139A of the Constitution of India, seeking the transfer of a case from one court to another. This petition is typically filed when there is a genuine concern about fairness, convenience, or the inability to conduct a free and fair trial in the original jurisdiction.

Transfer petitions can be categorized into two types: transfer of civil cases and transfer of criminal cases. For civil cases, the petitioner must demonstrate valid reasons such as inconvenience caused by distance, health issues, or potential bias. In criminal cases, the grounds often include threats to the safety of the accused, witnesses, or even the victim, making it impossible to ensure a fair trial in the current location.

The Supreme Court and High Courts have the authority to entertain transfer petitions. While the Supreme Court handles inter-state transfers or cases with constitutional significance, High Courts deal with transfers within their respective states. The courts assess factors like the balance of convenience, ends of justice, and the interest of all parties involved before granting the transfer.