CASE SUMMARY : STATE OF TAMIL NADU VS GOVERNOR OF TAMIL NADU

CITATION: 2025 INSC 481 | WRIT PETITION(CIVIL): No. 1239 OF 2023 BENCH: J. B. PARDIWALA AND R. MAHADEVANCOURT: SUPREME COURT OF INDIA | DECIDED: 8 APRIL 2025 INTRODUCTION On 8 April, 2025, a division bench of the Supreme Court presided by Justice J B Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan passed a landmark judgement in the case of State of Tamil Nadu Vs Governor of Tamil Nadu, the Court declared that Governor delaying in granting assent to thebills are illegal. The court ruled that the President and Governors do not enjoy an absolute veto over bills sent to them for assent and also prescribed timelines within which they should act on such bills. BACKGROUND Between 2020 and 2023, the Tamil Nadu assembly passed several bills in which many related to governance of state universities and other related state matters. All these bills after passed by the assembly were sent for the Governor assent under Article 200 of the constitution of India. But the Governor put reserved some of these […]

The post CASE SUMMARY : STATE OF TAMIL NADU VS GOVERNOR OF TAMIL NADU appeared first on Law Times Journal.

Popular posts from this blog

Criminal proceedings against encroachment on land of Gram Sabha can be taken together under Section 67 of Revenue Code: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court on September 23 said that criminal proceedings against encroachment on the land of Gram Sabha can be taken together under Section 67 of the Revenue Code, under Section 3/4 of the Prevention of Damage to Civil and Public Property Act. A Single Bench of Justice Yogendra Kumar Srivastava passed this order, while hearing an application filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 by one Srikant, seeking to quash the charge sheet dated May 14, 2015 as well as the cognizance order dated April 6, 2016 and also the entire proceedings of case under Section 3/4 of the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1894, registered at Police Station Jigna, District Mirzapur, pending before the 4th Additional Civil Judge (Junior Division), Mirzapur. The records of the case indicate that the criminal proceedings were initiated, pursuant to an FIR dated March 26, 2015 lodged against the applicant, which was registered as case under Section 3/4 of PDPP ...
Read more

Touching private parts of minor, kissing on lips does not amount to offence under Section 177 of IPC: Bombay High Court

Image
The Bombay High Court has observed that touching private parts of a minor and kissing on lips do not amount to unnatural offence under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. A Single-Judge Bench of Justice Anuja Prabhudessai made the remarks, while granting bail to an accused, after noting that the POCSO offences with which the accused was charged, were punishable with maximum imprisonment up to five years and the accused had been in custody for almost a year. It noted that the statement of the victim as well as the First Information Report prima facie indicated that the Applicant had touched the private parts of the victim and had kissed his lips. Section 377 defines unnatural offences as voluntarily having carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal and the punishment is imprisonment for life or imprisonment of either description for a term extending up to 10 years, noted the Bench. It added that the section clarifies that penetratio...
Read more

Supreme Court rejects petition against design of National Emblem installed atop Central Vista

Image
The Supreme Court rejected on Friday a petition filed against installing the State Emblem atop the Central Vista building, claiming that its design was in violation of the State Emblem of India (Prohibition Against Improper Use) Act, 2005. The Bench of Justice M.R. Shah and Justice Krishna Murari said that they have seen the emblem and found it not violative of the law. The Court remarked that the impression the emblem gives depends on the mind of the person. It was a matter of perception, not violation. The Bench said in its order that the Court has gone through the emblem of which grievance is made, and can say that it is not in contravention with the Act. The petition was filed by Advocates Aldanish Rein and Ramesh Kumar Mishra, who believed that the lions portrayed in the emblem inaugurated by Prime Minister Narendra Modi appear ferocious and aggressive with open mouth and visible canines, in contrast with the State Emblem preserved in the Sarnath Museum, where the li...
Read more