These judgments are significant milestones in the development of constitutional law, personal law, and fundamental rights jurisprudence in India.
Landmark judgments and the findings by Hon'ble courts are mentioned below. Evaluate the pairs: 1. Minerva Mills v. Union of India: The power of the Parliament to amend the Constitution is limited by the Constitution. 2. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum: Extended Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code to provide maintenance to a divorced Muslim woman. 3. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India: The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India struck down Section 66A of the Information Technology Act (IT Act), which violated freedom of speech and expression, declaring it to be unconstitutional. Which of the statements given above are correct?
Asked in GPSC Prelims CSP 1 2024 · Topic: The Supreme Court (Landmark Judgments and Doctrines)
More Indian Polity and Governance questions
- The Supreme Court of India has constituted a Committee of Administrators (COA) to run the BCCI. Who among the following is not a member of COA ?
- Which of the following statement(s) is(are) correct? 1. The judgment in First Judges Case declared that the Primacy of The CJI's recommendations to the President can be refused for cogent reasons. 2. The judgment in Second Judges Case declared that "justiciability" and "primacy" required that the CJI be given the "primal" role in such appointments. 3. The judgment in Three Judges Case ruled out the concept of "primacy" of the highest judiciary over the executive.
- The Supreme Court's I. R. Coelho Judgment (2007) is related to:
- I R Coelho judgment (2007) of the Supreme Court deals with :
- Consider the following statements regarding FASTER:
- The Doctrine of Fundamental Rights cannot be amended under Article 368 was propounded by the Supreme Court of India in
- Consider the following statements: Pravara v. Union of India Dwaraka Das v. Union of India Kesavananda Bharathi Ors v. Union of India N. Arunchalam (Dead) Anr. v. Union of India
- Which judgement of the Supreme Court declared transgenders as the 'third community' and ordered job applications to have a separate column for the third gender?