Search results for ‘SC 1982

Publishing scurrilous and defamatory articles in newspaper is not the job of a journalist [BHC]

SHRI DNYANDEVRAO TATYRAV WAGHMODE Vs. ALLABAKSHA GULAB NADAF AND OTHERS – The role of the journalist is far more noble. The media is called the fourth estate. But this type of misuse of the fourth estate is really deplorable. Once upon a time, journalists like Lokmanya Bal Gangadhar Tilak used this media for awakening the conscience of the people during the British Raj and for social, political and other worthy causes. Right to information is a fundamental right of the people, but this type of yellow journalism has to be condemned and those who resort to this type of cheap publicity and those who use their newspaper for blowing their own trumpet or for condemning and defaming others should be condemned themselves by the people. Using temperate, restrained and sophisticated language, which is at the same time effective and reaches and touches the soul of those who read it, is the key of success in the field of journalism. There are very few, who are endowed with these qualities. Newspapers like ‘Janhit’ and ‘Agman’ may be small newspapers. They are being circulated in a small town. They should aim at providing necessary and correct information and news-items to the people, to make them literate and more informative, so that they become aware as to what is going on around them.

Escort Services- Legal Aspects

Prostitution means the act of a female offering her body for promiscuous sexual intercourse for hire, whether in money or in kind, and whether offered immediately or otherwise, and the expression ‘prostitute’ shall be construed accordingly. The word ‘promiscuous’,. it excludes intercourse which a person may have with a permanently kept concubine. The import of that word is that the woman or girl offering her body offers it for hire to anyone who desired it for sexual intercourse.

Mithilesh Kumari & Anr vs Prem Behari Khare [All SC 1989 February]

A retrospective operation is, therefore, not to be given to a statute so as to impair existing right or obligation, otherwise than as regards matter of procedure .unless that effect cannot be avoided without doing violence to the language of the enactment. Before applying a statute retrospectively the Court has to be satisfied that the statute is in fact retrospective. The presumption against retrospective operation is strong in .cases in which the statute, if operated retrospectively, would prejudicially affect vested rights or the illegality of the past transactions, or impair contracts, or impose new duty or attach new disability in respect of past transactions or consideration already passed.

STATE OF HARYANA Vs. RAMA DIYA [All SC 1990 APRIL]

According to Section 433(A) that a prisoner who has been sentenced to death and whose death sentence has been commuted into one of imprisonment for life and persons who have been sentenced to imprisonment for life for an offence for which death is one of the punishments provided by law should undergo actual imprisonment of 14 years in Jail. We are referring to Section 433(A) in this judgment only for a limited purpose of showing that after the introduction of this section, the life convicts falling within the purview of Section 433(A) has to undergo the mandatory minimum 14 years of actual imprisonment. It may be mentioned at this juncture that no one has got a vested right to claim premature release on the ground that he has suffered the minimum actual imprisonment as prescribed under Section 433(A) because a sentence of ‘imprisonment for life’ is incarceration until death, that is, for the remaining period of convicted prison’s actual life

What to do if a Judge recorded wrong submission and something not submitted at all-SC

That is the only way to have the record corrected. If no such step is taken, the matter must necessarily end there. of course a party may resile and an Appellate Court may permit him in rare and appropriate cases to resile from a concession on the ground that the concession was made on a wrong appreciation of the law and had led to gross injustice; but, he may not call in question the very fact of making the concession as recorded in the judgment