Allahabad High Court Declines to Quash Case on observations about BJP-controlled states and constitution.
Introduction Recently, the Allahabad High Court denied the quashing of a criminal case against a man who was accused of…
Keeping Pace with Legal Change
Introduction Recently, the Allahabad High Court denied the quashing of a criminal case against a man who was accused of…
The highpoint in this regards is a petition has been placed in the Bombay High Court against the Maharashtra Navnirman…
This article focuses on rhetoric used by leaders of MNS based on language in Maharashtra that presents a challenge over constitutional rights, that is, freedom of speech versus freedom of order. It outlines the existence of Indian laws that bear relevance to hate speech and examines past and contemporary examples with attention to the damages on the basic rights and the position of the regulators to maintain conformity to the constitutional ideals.
The controversy surrounding Nishikant Dubey’s remarks serves as a reminder of the ongoing tension between upholding judicial dignity and safeguarding free speech. As India continues to evolve as a democratic nation, it is imperative to strike a balance that respects both the authority of the judiciary and the fundamental right to freedom of expression. Engaging in open dialogues and revisiting existing laws can pave the way for a more transparent and accountable legal system.