Legal Question in Constitutional Law in India

constitution

a decided case law abcl coporation v mahila jagaran munch


Asked on 12/09/08, 9:15 am

3 Answers from Attorneys

Aniruddha Pawse Aniruddha.P.Pawse Advocates

Re: constitution

query please

Read more
Answered on 12/10/08, 9:48 am
Sudershan Goel India Law Offices of Sudershan Goel - Advocate

Re: constitution

You should better state your problem for appropriate guidance.

Read more
Answered on 12/09/08, 2:13 pm
Homi Maratha N.N. Maratha & Co.-Advocates

Re: constitution

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 2021 of 1997 (Arising out of SLP (C) No. 22902 of 1996)

Decided On: 20.01.1997

Appellants: Amitabh Bachchan Corpn. Ltd.

Vs.

Respondent: Mahila Jagran Manch and Ors.

ORDER

A.M Ahmadi, C.J.I.

1. Special leave granted.

2. We have heard learned Counsel for the appellant as well as the State of Karnataka, none appearing on behalf of Respondent 1, the original petitioner. A letter petition was filed by Respondent 1-Society, purporting to be in public interest seeking certain directions in relation to the "Miss World-1996" contest arranged at Bangalore. The directions were to restrain the appellant herein from holding the contest anywhere in India including Bangalore, to restrain the Ministry of External Affairs from issuing visas to the contestants, etc., to restrain the State of Karnataka and its Departments from extending any facility or cooperation for holding the Beauty Pageant, recover charges for the use of the Press Conference Hall at Vidhan Sabha from the appellant and the State be ordered to tender an apology for announcing the event from Vidhan Sabha, etc., etc. The petition came up for hearing before a learned Single Judge of the High Court. The learned Single Judge by a detailed and well-reasoned judgment dated 13-9-1996 came to the conclusion that the petition was misconceived and the allegations on the basis of which it was founded were preposterous and that the Beauty Pageant to be held at Bangalore would not be offensive to our sense of morality and decency; nor could it be deemed as obscene in the eye of law. The learned Single Judge also held that no group of individuals can, while fighting for their so-called rights and freedoms, howsoever noble or just their cause may be, trample the rights and freedom of others. In his view while it may be perfectly legal for a group of activists to agitate for the rights and freedom of any section of the citizenry, such agitation cannot be extended to prevent other sections of citizenry or group of individuals from exercising their rights and freedoms. Briefly put, the learned Judge was of the opinion that the

Read more
Answered on 12/13/08, 8:35 am


Related Questions & Answers

More Constitutional Law questions and answers in India