Legally Sane

On 19/07/2022, The HMJ PV Kunhikrishnan of the High Court of Kerala in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 4262 of 2022 titled XXX & Anr. Vs. The Registrar of Births and Deaths & Ors., has delivered a very significant and reforming judgment reiterating the position taken by the Hon’ble Apex Court and other Hon’ble High Courts regarding the rights of single mothers raising their children alone and the rights of those children with respect to the issuance of their birth certificates and other documents without the name of their father, wherein, the Petitioner-son was conceived by the Petitioner-mother, while she was a minor under mysterious circumstance by an unidentified person. Therefore the father's name of the Petitioner-son happened to be recorded differently in different documents. The name of the Petitioner-mother is correctly recorded in all identification and education certificates. Since the paternal name of the Petitioner-son appears differently in different documents and th...

On 19/05/2022, A Full Bench of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Criminal Appeal No. 135 of 2010 titled Bhudadev Karmaskar Vs. The State of West Bengal & Ors., issued directions, through an order exercising powers conferred under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, relating to the rehabilitation measures in respect of sex workers and other connected issues wherein pursuant to an order passed by the Supreme Court on 19.07.2011, a Panel was constituted. The terms of reference made to the panel are:  (1) Prevention of trafficking,  (2) Rehabilitation of sex workers who wish to leave sex work, and  (3) Conditions conducive for sex workers who wish to continue working as sex workers with dignity. In 2016, the panel made several recommendations with respect to the abovesaid references and thereafter Government of India informed the Court that the recommendations made by the panel were considered by the GoI and draft legislation was published incorporating the reco...

There is no prima facie irregularity in the judgment pronounced by the DJ, Mathura if the 1968 agreement is genuine and does not violate the provisions of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 or any other relevant provisions of law, time being in force, and most importantly, after the said agreement, one Consent Decree (Compromise Decree) was also passed in 1974 which makes the agreement valid and binding unless otherwise decided by the Court of Justice. Further, the effect of this judgment does not render the Act of 1991 a nugatory rather it substantiates the validity of the said Act. In pursuance of learning this aspect, we need to understand the basics of the Act of 1991. It prohibits two things- Firstly, the conversion of any place of worship of any religious denomination or any section thereof into a place of worship of a DIFFERENT SECTION of the SAME RELIGIOUS DENOMINATION (it means the temple of one deity cannot be converted into the temple of another deity of same religious denomina...