The nation-wide outrage over the brutal gang rape and subsequent death of the physiotherapy intern in India’s very own capital city, New Delhi was the driving force behind the passing of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013. It has been known all over as one of the most concrete steps taken by the Indian government to curb violence against women. Major amendments by the Act, not only widen the ambit of certain offences but also recognise new offences like acid attacks which earlier lacked a specific provision and definition in the Code. The Act is deemed to be one of the most important changes that have been made in the existing criminal laws namely the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Indian Evidence Act.
A sentence, whether absolvitor or condemnatory, is a complete bar, not only to any subsequent trial for the same offence, but for any other crime involving the same species facti, whether at the instance of the public or private property. This principle of double jeopardy has been a part of the legal system since man can remember and is an honest endeavour to protect the non-guilty ones. It can therefore be considered a positive and just doctrine based on equity, justice and good conscience.
The ‘Pleasure Doctrine’ is a principle of the common law, the origins of which may be traced back to the development of the concept in the United Kingdom. Similar provisions have been included in the Constitution of India to protect the interest of civil servants along with the protection of national security and public interest. This power to dismiss a Government servant at pleasure is subject to only those exceptions which are specified in the Constitution itself. It must be ensured that civil servants can’t make mockery of law if they are guilty and it is precisely for that reason, that the continued use of Doctrine of Pleasure is required in India.
Due to some social structures, traditions, stereotypes and attitudes about women and their role in society, they become particularly vulnerable to certain crimes. Fundamentalist groups often center on controlling women, using cultural arguments against women’s rights. Moreover, most women in developing countries are unaware of their basic human rights. It is this state of ignorance which ensures their acceptance and, consequently, the perpetuation of harmful traditional practices affecting their well-being and that of their children. Even when women acquire a degree of economic and political awareness, they often feel powerless to bring about the change necessary to eliminate gender inequality. Therefore, empowering women is vital to any process of change and to the elimination of these harmful traditional practices.
The fundamental attribute of corporate personality, from which all other consequences flow if that the corporation is a legal entity distinct from its members.This doctrine has been established for business efficacy, necessity and convenience. In the doctrine of ‘Lifting the Corporate Veil’, the law goes behind the mask or veil of incorporation in order to determine the real person behind the mask of a company. It is one of the most widely used doctrines to decide when a shareholder or shareholders will be held liable for obligations of the corporation and continues to be the most litigated and most discussed doctrines in all of corporate law. Therefore, a study of the same through the lens of leading case laws and judgements as done by the authors would be highly beneficial.
By Nilesh Kr. Bhardwaj University School of Law and Legal Studies, GGSIPU, Dwarka, Delhi “ Editor’s Note: In today’s socio-economic scenario, the administrative authorities in addition
The Armed Forces Special Powers Act (AFSPA) was implemented by Indian government in 1958 in the context of separatist movements and the violence caused by them. It has received mixed reactions from across the country and has always been a debatable issue. The authors after a detailed analysis have concluded that there is nothing wrong with AFSPA as a law, but it is prone to more negative construction than positive construction. The criticism of the Act clearly outweighs the benefits provided by it. So, for a more successful implementation of the Act, more amendments are required that leave no lacunae in the interpretation of its provisions.
It is because of a system for Public Interest Litigation that the Indian judiciary has been able to help in cooling down a few controversial policy questions. One could think of the controversy about the reservation of seats for SCs/STs and other backwards classes in employment or educations institutions, the government policies of liberalisation and privatisation and the contested height of the Narmada dam as examples of this kind of contribution. However, it is critical to ensure that PIL does not become a back-door to enter the temple of justice to fulfill private interests, settle political scores or simply to gain easy publicity. While critics have been persuasive when pointing to particular cases, the sheer number of cases, as well as the variation in tendencies over time and among court benches, has made reaching a general conclusion difficult.
Editor’s Note: Till recently, the courts had to rely on non-scientific evidences only because of the non-availability of proper technology. Scientific evidences are crucial to the fact finder in order to arrive at the logical consequence in deciding large number of issues brought before him/her. In the present era, they have almost become indispensable to them. However, a key issue which can be encountered by a judge/jury when ever scientific evidence is put before him/them is whether scientific evidence is worth believing or not. This is because due to the subjective nature of tests like narcoanalysis, the foremost criticism levelled against conducting the test is its conclusiveness. Therefore, there is a need for the Central government to make a clear policy stand on narco analysis because what is at stake is India’s commitment to individual freedoms and a clean criminal justice system.
Reforms in international commercial law have long been the centre of international efforts to facilitate international commercial transactions with lower costs to enterprises and higher legal certainty. As world trade and communications became increasingly interdependent, an intermediate period fostered the growth of a limited type of substantive international law, based primarily upon the common trade usages and practices among merchants, as well as such universally recognized legal principles. Lex mercatoria is a growing body of such international customary laws. However, its status as a legitimate source of law distinct and autonomous from national legal systems stands on debatable grounds with arguments both supporting and dissenting the same and hence remains uncertain.