Fundamental Right - Law Dictionary Search Results
Home Dictionary Name: fundamental right Page: 2Habeas corpora juratorum
Habeas corpora juratorum, Law Latin (that you have the bodies of the jurors), a process which issued out of the Court of Common Pleas, commanding the sheriff to summon a jury. The practice was similar to the distringas from the King's Bench and Exchequer for the same purpose. Abolished by C.L.O. Act, 1852, s. 104.Is a writ or order requiring that a prisoner be brought before a court at a stated time and place to decide the legality of his detention or imprison-ment, Webster American Dictionary, p. 856.Commands the Judge of the inferior court to produce the body of the defendant with a statement of the cause of his detention, to do and to receive what-ever the higher court shall decree, A Dictionary of Law, William C. Anderson, 1889, p. 500.Is a high prerogative writ of English Common Law, Habeas Corpus Act of 1979 and 1816 are basis of security for the enjoyment of personal freedom, Webster American Dictionary, p. 856.In India every High Court is empowered to issue the prerogative writ...
Low visibility rules
Low visibility rules, these are rules of law which are made inaccessible to the public. Generally these are obscure laws, with far reaching powers and which infringe fundamental rights and those which the state does not wish to publicize. 'Fundamental rights cease to be viable if laws calculated to constrict their sweep are withheld from public access; and the freedoms under Art. 19(1) cannot be restricted by hidden or 'low visibility rules' beyond discovery by fair search. ' [Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration, AIR 1978 SC 1675 (1721), para 93] - here reference is made to the Punjab Jail Manual which was not made available to prisoners and was priced so high that few could buy. (Justice V.R. Krishna Iyer)...
Mandamous
Mandamous, in India, the Supreme Court can issue it for the enforcement of any of the Fundamental Rights, the High Courts are empowered to issue it for any other purpose to, Constitution of India, Arts. 32 and 226.Mandamous, the Supreme Court and High Courts do not issue against the legislature, even when it is going to enact a law which offends against Fundamental Rights, Chhotey Lal v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1951 All 326....
Reasonableness and in public interest
Reasonableness and in public interest, the integra-tion of Articles 14, 19 and 21 analysed by this Court in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, (1978) 2 SCR 621: (1978) 1 SCC 248, clearly demonstrates that the requirements of reasonableness runs like a golden thread through the entire fabric of fundamental rights and, as several decisions of this court show, this concept of reasonableness finds its positive manifestation and expression in the lofty ideal of social and economic justice which inspires and animates the directive principles. It has been laid down by this court in E. P. Royappa v. State of Tamil Nadu, (1974) 2 SCR 348: (1974) 4 SCC 3) and Maneka Gandhi case, (1978) 2 SCR 621: (1978) 1 SCC 248 that Article 14 strikes at arbitrariness in State action and since the principle of reasonableness and rationality, which is legally as well as philoso-phically an essential element of equality or non-arbitrariness, is projected by this Article, it must characterise every governmental act...
Void
Void, 'the erosion of the distinction between juris-dictional errors and non-jurisdictional errors has, correspondingly eroded the distinction between void and voidable decision. The courts have become increasingly impatient with the distinction, to the extent that (1) All official decisions are presumed to be valid until set aside or otherwise held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction', Judicial Review of Administrative Action, De Smith, Woolf and Jowell, 1995 Edn., p. 259-60.Void, denotes 'if an act or decision, or an order or other instrument is invalid, it should, in principal be null and void for all purposes; and it has been said that there are no degrees of nullity. Even though such an act is wrong and lacking in jurisdiction, however, it subsists and remains fullyeffective unless and until it is set aside by a court of competent jurisdiction. Until its validity is challenged, its legality is preserved', Halsbury's Laws of England, 4th Edn., (Re-issue), Vol. 1(1), ...
Res judicata
Res judicata, a final judgment already decided between the same parties or their privies on the same question by a legally constituted Court having jurisdiction is conclusive between the parties, and the issue cannot be raised again. The judgment may have been given by a foreign Court, Tarleton v. Tarleton, 4 M&S 21. A matter which is res judicata cannot be further gone into; but if the decision was obtained by fraud it can be set aside, Cole v. Langford, (1898) 2 QB 36. Criminal proceedings do not constitute a res judicata as regards civil proceedings arising out of the same facts, Caione v. Palace Shipping Co., (1907) 1 KB 670; and see also Anderson v. Collinson, (1901) 2 KB 107. See ESTOPPEL.When it is said that a previous decision is res judicata, it is meant that the right claimed has been adjudicated upon and cannot again be placed in contest between the same parties. A previous decision of a competent Court on fact which are the foundation of the right and the relevant law appli...
Right of privacy
Right of privacy, any right to privacy must encom-pass and protect the personal intimacies of the home, the family, marriage, motherhood, pro-creation and child rearing. This catalogue approach to the question is obviously not as instructive as it does not give analytical picture of the distinctive characteristics of threat of privacy. Perhaps, the only suggestion that can be offered as unifying principle underlying the concept has been the assertion that a claimed right must be a fundamental right implicit in the concept of ordered liberty, Govind v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1975 SC 1378: (1975) 2 SCC 148: (1975) 3 SCR 946. [Constitution of India, Arts. 21, 19(1)(d)]...
Reasonable restriction
Reasonable restriction, the expression 'reasonable restriction' signifies that the limitation imposed on a person in enjoyment of the right should not be arbitrary or of an excessive nature, beyond what is required in the interests of the public. The test of reasonableness, wherever prescribed, should be applied to each individual statute impugned, and no abstract standard, or general pattern of reasonableness can be laid down as applicable in all cases. The restriction which arbitrarily or excessively invades the right cannot be said to contain the quality of reasonableness and unless it strikes a proper balance between the freedom guaranteed in art. 19(1)(g) and the social control permitted by cl. (6) of art. 19, it must be held to be wanting in that quality, Bishamber Dayal Chandra Mohan v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1982 SC 33 (35): (1982) 1 SCC 39: (1982) 1 SCR 1137.The expression 'reasonable restrictions' signifies that the limitation imposed on a person in enjoyment of that rig...
Bill of Rights
Bill of Rights, a declaration delivered by the Lords and Commons to the Prince and Princess of Orange, and afterwards enacted in Parliament, when they became King and Queen, as 1 W. & M., sess. 2, c. 2. Its Preambles sets forth that King James, by the assistance of evil counsellors, endeavoured 'to subvert and extirpate the Protestant religion and the laws and liberties of this kingdom,' by exercising a power of dispensing with and suspending of laws; by levying money for the use of the Crown by pretence of prerogative, without consent of Parliament; by prosecuting those who petitioned the King, and discouraging petitions; by raising and keeping a standing army in time of peace; by violating the freedom of election of members to serve in Parliament; by violent prosecutions and the causing partial and corrupt jurors to be returned on trials, excessive bail to be taken, excessive fines to be imposed, and cruel punishments to be inflicted; all of which are declared to be illegal; and the ...
Freedom of press
Freedom of press, means right of citizen to speak, publish and express their view as well as right or people to read, Bennett Coleman and Co. v. Union of India, (1972) 2 SCC 788. See also People's Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India, (2003) 4 SCC 399.Freedom of press, Freedom of press as the petitioners rightly assert means freedom from interference from authority which would have the effect of interference with the content and circulation of newspapers, Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Private Ltd. v. Union of India, AIR 1986 SC 515: (1985) 1 SCC 641: (1985) 2 SCR 287.Is a freedom included in the fundamental right to the freedom of speech and expression, Express Newspapers v. Union of India, AIR 1958 SC 578.Is freedom of speech and of press lie at the foundation of all democratic organizations, Romesh Thapper v. State of Madras, 1950 SCR 594.In U.K., it is a part of the individual right of freedom of discussion, Commentary on the Constitution of India, Durga Das Basu, Vol. C...
- << Prev.
- Next >>
Sign-up to get more results
Unlock complete result pages and premium legal research features.
Start Free Trial