The 50 Most Important Indian Court Judgments Explained

#Case Name
1A.D.M. Jabalpur v. Shiv Kant Shukla (The Habeas Corpus Case)
2Ajit Singh v. State of Punjab
3Apparel Export Promotion Council v. A.K. Chopra
4Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab
5BALCO Employees Union v. Union of India
6Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India
7Budhan Choudhary v. State of Bihar
8Chief Forest Conservator (Wild Life) v. Nisar Khan
9D.K. Basu v. State of West Bengal
10Daniel Latifi v. Union of India
11Dr (Mrs.) Vijaya Manohar Arbat v. Kashirao Rajaram Sawai
12Dr. Mahachandra Prasad Singh v. Chairman, Bihar Legislative Council
13Dr. Pradeep Jain v. Union of India
14Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India
15Forum, Prevention of Envn. and Sound Pollution v. Union of India
16Gaurav Jain v. Union of India
17Hoechst Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. State of Bihar
18I.C. Golak Nath v. State of Punjab
19In re, Vinay Chandra Mishra
20In Re: Death of Sawinder Singh Grover
21Indian Council for Enviro-Legal Action v. Union of India
22Indra Sawhney v. Union of India
23L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India
24Laxmi Kant Pandey v. Union of India
25M/s Modi Cements Limited v. Shri Kuchil Kumar Nandi
26M/s Shantistar Builders v. Narayan Khimalal Totame
27Mackinnon Mackenzie & Co. Ltd. v. Audrey D’costa
28Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
29Minerva Mills v. Union of India
30Mr. X v. Hospital Z
31Nandini Satpathy v. P.L. Dani
32Narayan Prasad Lohia v. Nikunj Kumar Lohia
33Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India
34Poonam Verma v. Dr. Ashwin Patel
35Parmanand Katara v. Union of India
36PUCL v. Union of India
37Rai Sahib Ram Jawaya Kapur v. State of Punjab
38Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra
39S.P. Sampath Kumar v. Union of India
40Sakshi v. Union of India
41Sheela Barse v. State of Maharashtra
42Bodhisattwa Gautam v. Miss Subhra Chakraborty
43Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab
44Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India
45Standard Chartered Bank v. Directorate of Enforcement
46State of Gujarat v. Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat
47State of Rajasthan v. Union of India
48Sunil Batra (II) v. Delhi Administration
49Vincent v. Union of India
50Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan

Back
Next

(6) Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India, AIR 1984 SC 802

Facts in Brief

The Petitioner was an organisation dedicated to the cause of releasing bonded labourers. It conducted a survey of stone quarries in the Faridabad District near Delhi and found that a large number of labourers from Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan were working in these stone quarries under “inhuman and intolerable conditions,” and that many of them were bonded labourers. The Petitioner accordingly addressed a letter to the Supreme Court setting out these circumstances and filed a Public Interest Litigation, alleging that hundreds of workmen were living in bondage and under inhuman conditions. The Court appointed a Commissioner to look into the matter within three to four days and to submit a report to the Court.

Judgment

Upon receiving the Commissioner’s report, which detailed violations of various constitutional and human rights of the poor labourers, the Apex Court declared that Article 21 of the Constitution assures the right to live with human dignity, free from exploitation. It held that the State was under a constitutional obligation to ensure that there was no violation of the fundamental rights of any person, particularly those belonging to the weaker sections of society. The State was bound to ensure observance of the social welfare and labour laws enacted to secure workmen a basic human dignity.

Thereupon, the Apex Court issued a set of 21 guidelines to the Central Government as well as the State Governments to check such gross abuses of citizens’ rights in the future. The Court also appointed a Joint Secretary in the Ministry of Labour, Government of India, as a Commissioner to carry out the task of seeing that the directions were fulfilled.

For the Common Man

The Court’s concern in securing the release and rehabilitation of the bonded labourers in the present case set the trend in the Court of ensuring that no such violation of the fundamental and human rights of citizens would recur. It is clear now that the Courts in India will not allow anyone to be held in bondage by anyone on account of grave poverty or illness. All citizens have an equal right to survival, and it is the duty of the State to ensure the same.


Back
Next