Landmark Civil Cases in India: Key Judgments & Impact

• The case was brought by A.K. Gopalan, a communist leader.
• The case challenged the constitutionality of the Preventive Detention Act of 1950, which allowed the government to detain people without trial.
• The court ruled that Article 21 of the Constitution did not require Indian courts to apply a due process of law standard
• The court upheld the constitutionality of the act, but found that section 14 of the act violated constitutional rights.

LEGAL IMPACT:

• The case set a precedent for the protection of citizens’ rights under preventive detention law
• The case laid the groundwork for later cases

• Kesavananda Bharati, the head of a Hindu religious mutt in Kerala, filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the of the Indian Constitution.
• It was a landmark case in the history of India’s Constitution
• The case challenged the 24th, 25th, and 29th Amendments to the Constitution
• The Supreme Court ruled in favor of Kesavananda Bharati by a 7-6 majority
• The court held that the Constitution has a basic structure that cannot be changed by Parliament.
• It was decided that Parliament can amend the Constitution to fulfil its socio-economic obligations, but only if the amendment does not change the basic structure.

LEGAL IMPACT:

• The case affirmed the supremacy of the Constitution and the independence of the judiciary
• Secular and federal character of the Constitution was established
• It also established the principles of the rule of law and separation of powers between legislative, executive and judiciary.

• Maneka Gandhi’s passport was impounded by an Order of Passport Authority, GoI
• Maneka Gandhi filed a Writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, challenging the order on the grounds that it violated Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution
• This case overturned a previous ruling of A.K. Gopalan V. State of Madras (S.C.)
• The case received the Supreme Court the name “watchdog of democracy

LEGAL IMPACT:

• The case introduced the doctrine of due process of law in the Indian legal system
• The case expanded the scope of Article 21, which guarantees the protection of life and personal liberty
• The case established the “Golden Triangle” rule, which links Articles 14, 19, and 21.

• The case challenged the government’s implementation of the recommendations of the Mandal Commission
• This case is popularly known as Mandal Commission case
• The Commission recommended a 27% reservation in government jobs for these classes

LEGAL IMPACT:

• The case upheld a 50% quota for reservations in government jobs and education for OBCs
• It ruled that reservations should be based on social backwardness, not economic factors
• It struck down the government’s decision to reserve 10% of jobs for economically backward classes from higher castes
• It ruled that reservations cannot be applied to promotions

• The Court discussed at length provisions of Article 356 of the Constitution of India
• This case had huge impact on Centre-State Relations
• This case raised serious question of law relating to proclamation of President Rule and dissolution of Legislative assemblies according to Article 356 of the Constitution of India.
• The President’s power to dismiss a state government is not absolute.
• The President can only suspend the Legislative Assembly until Parliament approves the President’s Rule.
• The President’s proclamation can be struck down if it’s based on irrelevant grounds or is mala fide.

LEGAL IMPACT:

• The case had a huge impact on Centre-State Relations
• The case established that courts can examine presidential proclamations for illegality

• PIL (Public Interest Litigation) was filed against the State of Rajasthan and the Central Government of India to enforce the fundamental rights of working women under Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
• The petition was filed after Bhanwari Devi, a social worker in Rajasthan, who was brutally gang raped for stopping a child marriage.
• This case is also popularly known as the Vishaka Guidelines.
• It is seen as a significant legal victory for women’s groups in India

LEGAL IMPACT:

• Established guidelines to prevent sexual harassment in workplaces, later forming the basis for POSH Act.
• Interpreted the right to work with human dignity in Articles 14, 15, 19(1)(g) and 21 of the Constitution

• Two petitions were filed before the Supreme Court, one by Advocate Lily Thomas and the second by Lok Prahari, through its General Secretary S.N. Shukla, both of which pertained to the question of whether MLAs or MPs should be disqualified after they are convicted in a criminal case
• Popularly known as MLA Disqualification Case
• Ruled that an MP, MLA, or MLC who is convicted of a crime that carries a sentence of more than two years in prison is not eligible to serve as an elected representative

LEGAL IMPACT:

• The judgment has provided that all the elected or non-elected MPs and MLAs would be disqualified with the immediate effect if they were convicted in a criminal case by a trial court and the saving clause under section 8(4) will not be applicable