February 2, 2026 7:48 am

Supreme Court Seeks Suggestions To Modify 2017 Order Mandating PUC Certificate For Vehicle Insurance

Bysclaw

May 26, 2024

This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register below.

By sclaw

Related Post

National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 — Sections 15, 20 — Environmental compensation — Quantification — Project cost — NGT has discretion to mould relief based on polluter pays principle, scale of offending activity, and capacity of violator — Project turnover or cost can be relevant yardstick for determining compensation — Large scale operations indicate bigger environmental footprint and greater responsibility — Compensation must be rational, proportionate, and reasoned — Mechanical application of turnover or project cost is impermissible. (Paras 19, 20, 21, 22, 25, 26, 27, 28, 46.2)

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

Environmental Law — Wildlife Protection and Conservation — Protection of Great Indian Bustard (GIB) and Lesser Florican (LF) — Conflict between conservation goals and green energy generation (solar/wind) — Supreme Court modified earlier blanket prohibition on overhead transmission lines based on Expert Committee recommendations to balance non-negotiable preservation of GIB with sustainable development and India’s international climate change commitments — Importance of domain expert advice in policy matters concerning conservation and infrastructure development affirmed. (Paras 6, 14, 15, 60, 61)

Jan 1, 2026 sclaw

Constitution Environment

Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 21 — Right to Life and Healthy Environment — Environmental Degradation: Pollution of Jojari, Bandi, and Luni Rivers in Rajasthan due to untreated industrial effluents and municipal sewage threatens the lives of 2 million people and the ecosystem — This constitutes a gross dereliction of constitutional duty and a direct constitutional injury — The right to a healthy environment, including pollution-free water and air, is an indispensable facet of the right to life under Article 21, reinforced by Articles 48A and 51A(g) — Judicial intervention is warranted when environmental degradation strikes at the foundation of these guarantees. (Paras 3, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 28)

Nov 30, 2025 sclaw

Categories

Archives

You missed

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 108, 80, 103, 85 — Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Sections 3, 4 — Offences — Abetment to suicide, Dowry death, Murder — Allegations of extra-marital relationship, demand of money/dowry — Deceased died of poisoning/injection — Autopsy findings — Prosecution case not strong at bail stage.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 33(1) — Requirement for employer to seek permission before altering service conditions or stopping work of workmen during pendency of dispute — Failure to do so constitutes a breach of the Act.

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Sections 10(1), 12 — Reference of industrial dispute — Apprehended dispute — Appropriate Government’s power to refer — The appropriate Government has the power to refer an industrial dispute for adjudication if it is of the opinion that such dispute exists or is apprehended. The initiation of conciliation proceedings under Section 12 does not statutorily require a prior demand notice to the employer as a pre-condition to approaching the Conciliation Officer. The management’s argument that a prior demand notice is essential, based on certain previous judgments, fails as it ignores the provision for referring an apprehended dispute, which can be invoked to prevent industrial unrest

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw

Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita

Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 175(4) — Complaints against public servants alleged to have committed offenses in discharge of official duties — Interpretation — This provision is not a standalone provision, nor is it a proviso to Section 175(3) — It must be read in harmony with Section 175(3), with Section 175(4) forming an extension of Section 175(3) — The power to order investigation under Section 175(3) is conferred upon a judicial magistrate, while Section 175(4) also confers such power but prescribes a special procedure for complaints against public servants — The expression “complaint” in Section 175(4) does not encompass oral complaints and must be understood in the context of a written complaint supported by an affidavit, as required by Section 175(3) — This interpretation ensures that the procedural safeguard of an affidavit, mandated by Priyanka Srivastava v. State of U.P., is not undermined even when dealing with public servants — The intention is to provide a two-tier protection: first, at the threshold stage under Section 175(4) with additional safeguards, and second, at the post-investigation stage under Section 218(1) regarding previous sanction. (Paras 26, 31, 37.1, 37.2, 37.4, 37.5, 37.6, 37.8, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44)

Feb 1, 2026 sclaw