Ramesh Dalal vs Union of India (1988)
Freedom of artistic expression cannot be restricted without clear harm; Article 32 remedies apply only if a fundamental right is directly affected.
Curated legal news, case breakdowns, and workflow tips for fast-moving practitioners.
Showing 5 of 592 articles.
Freedom of artistic expression cannot be restricted without clear harm; Article 32 remedies apply only if a fundamental right is directly affected.
Affirmed courts’ power to limit publicity; judicial orders aren’t directly challengeable under Article 32 if restrictions are reasonable under Article 19(2).
This judgment upheld maintenance for divorced Muslim women under Sec 125 CrPC beyond iddat, reinforcing gender equality and supporting the idea of a Uniform Civil Code.
This ruling upheld the State’s power to impose retrospective taxes if constitutionally valid, affirming that retrospective laws aren’t invalid if within legislative competence.
This PIL marked the judiciary’s active role in environmental protection, reinforcing duties to prevent water pollution and shaping India’s green jurisprudence.