INTRODUCTION The Indian Penal Code, 1860 defines rash driving or riding on a public way and causing death by negligence. Rash driving or riding on a public way is defined under Sec. 279 and causing death by negligence is defined under Sec. 304A of Indian Penal Code (IPC). One of the most frequently misunderstood traffic offenses is that commonly referred to as “reckless driving.” And this reckless driving only deals with great damage of life and prospects in the society. In many states judicial definitions of reckless driving are found in cases where in the courts have construed homicide statutes…
Author: aditya tripathi
Title of the case: Shreya Singhal vs Union of India Citation: AIR 2015 SC 1523 Court:- Supreme Court of India Bench:- J. Chelameswar, Rohinton Fali Nariman Parties: Petitioner: Shreya Singhal Respondent: Union of India Brief Facts of the Case: In the year 2012, two girls named as Shaheen Dhada and Rinu Srinivasan, was arrested by the Mumbai police. The arrest was made for expressing their displeasure at a bandh which was called in by the members of Shiv Sena people in Maharashtra for the incident of Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackery’s death. The accusation made against the petitioners was that…
Title of the case: Sabhajit Tewary v. Union of IndiaCitation: 1975 AIR 1329Court: Supreme Court of IndiaBench (quorum): A.N. Ray, KuttyilKurien Mathew, Y.V. Chandrachud, Alagiriswami and A.C. GuptaParties:Appellant: Sabhajit TewaryRespondent: Union of India & OthersFacts of the case:The case is based on the background of the “pre – emergency era” reign of Indira Gandhi. This case was decided on that time when Indira Gandhi government was there in power. During this time the government exercised its power arbitrarily and oppressed people. In order to enforce its schemes and plans it curtailed the fundamental rights of the people. In this case,…
Title of the case: People’s Union for Democratic Rights and Others Vs.: Union of India & OthersCitation: AIR 1982 SC 1473Court: Supreme Court of IndiaBench (quorum): Bhagwati, P.N., Islam, Baharul (J)Parties:Appellant: People’s Union for Democratic Rights and OthersRespondent: Union of India & OthersFacts of the CaseIn this case there was a complaint of a violation of Article 24 of the constitution (which prohibits employing children below the age of 14 years in hazardous employment) on behalf of child labourers employed in construction work in Delhi. Also, the labourers who worked on the ASIAD-82 sites both on stadia and the infrastructure…
