Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Best Association of Lawyers in UT CHandigarh

It only means that all persons similarly circum- stanced shall be treated alike both in privileges conferred and liabilities imposed . It is at once obvious that, according to the test thus formulated, the validity of State action, legisla- tive or executive, is made entirely dependent on the state of mind of the authority. I do not consider it necessary to pursue this matter any further, as in my opinion even on the U. As regards such cases, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 Willoughby states at page of his Volume III on the Constitution of the United States :– “It is, however, to be observed in this connection, that the prohibitions apply to the acts of State officials even when they are done in pursuance of some State legislative direction, for, while no constitutional objection may be made to any law of the State, it has been held that its officials may exercise their public authority in such a discriminatory or arbitrary manner as to bring them within the scope of the prohibitions of the Fourteenth Amendment.

And the latest decision in Kotch v. Section then lays down that a Special Court shall try such offences or classes of offences or cases or classes of cases as the State Gov- ernment may, by general or special order, in writing direct. Another to raising funds is by organizing personalized events. Thus, it is not enough merely to classify but the classification must not be ‘discriminatory’, it must not amount to ‘hostile action’, there must be ‘reasonable grounds for distinction’, it must be ‘rational’ and there must be no ‘substantial discrimination’.

The High Court by a Full Bench consisting of the Chief Justice and four other Judges quashed the conviction and directed the trial of the respondent and the other accused persons according to law. They arose out of the fight for freedom in this land and are but the endeavour to compress into a few pregnant phrases some of the main attributes of a sovereign democratic republic as seen through Indian eyes.

Leaving aside articles to as irrelevant for present purposes, we proceed to articles , and , which deal with prosecutions and convictions for offences and cases of preventive detention and prescribe, in rough and general outline, certain matters of procedure. The Union of India ; S. So long as the possibility of its being applied for purposes not sanctioned by the Constitution cannot be ruled out, it must be held to be wholly unconsti- tutional and void. It encounters and must deal with the problems which come from persons in an infinite variety of relations.

That the Special Act lays down substantially different rules for trial of offences and cases than laid down in the general law of the land, i. the procedure laid down by the Act for the trial by the Special Courts varied substantially from that laid down for the trial of offences generally by the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Act did not classify, or lay down any basis for classification, of the cases which may be directed to be tried by the Special Court, but left it to the uncontrolled discretion of the State Government to direct any case which it liked to be tried by the Special Court.

In a warrant case the entire proceeding is before the same Magistrate and the same officer who frames the charge hears the case finally. S the Board of Supervisors unless it was located in a building constructed of brick or stone, was held discriminatory and unconstitutional. ‘The classification must not be arbitrary but must be rational, that is to say, it must not only be based on some quali- ties or characteristics which are to be found in all the persons grouped together and not in others who are left out but those qualities or characteristics must have a reasonable relation to the object of the legislation.

It should be noted that there is no reference to intention in article and the gravamen of that Article is equality of treatment. but, viewed in the background of our history. However much the real ground of decision may be hidden behind a screen of words like ‘reasonable’, ‘substantial’, ‘rational’ and ‘arbitrary’ the fact would remain that judges are sub- stituting their own judgment of what is right and proper and reasonable and just for that of the legislature; and up to a point that, I think, is inevitable when a judge is called upon to crystallise a vague generality like article into a concrete concept.

That is so; yet to carry that presumption to the extent of always holding that there must be some undisclosed intention or reason for subjecting certain individuals to a hostile and discriminatory legislation is to make the pro- tection clause of article , in the words of an American decision, a mere rope of sand, in no manner restraining State action. Prima facie those words do not contem- plate any particular offender or any particular accused in any particular case.

It does not prohibit legislation, which is limited either in the objects to which it is directed or by the territory within which it is to operate. The Constitution must, in my judgment, be left elastic enough to meet from time to time the altering conditions of a changing world with its shifting emphasis and differing needs. Although the preamble to an Act cannot override the plain meaning of its operative parts, it may nevertheless assist in ascertaining what the true meaning or implication of a particular section is; and the part of sec.

purports to provide for the matters to be tried by a special court and does not, in form, seek to define the kind or class of offences or cases which the State Government is empowered under the Act to assign to such a court for trial. Per FAZL ALl, MAHAJAN, MUKHERJEA and CHANDRASEKHARA AIYAR JJ. It does not, either in terms or by necessary implication, discriminate as between persons or classes of persons; nor does it purport to deny to any one equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws.

It can recognise even “degrees of evil ” , but the classification should never be arbitrary, artificial or evasive. The departure in each case is plainly calculated to shorten the trial and thus to attain the declared objective of the statute. Persons thus sent up for trial by a Special Court cannot point their fingers to the other persons who may be charged before an ordinary Court with similar or even same species of offences in a different place and in different circum- stances and complain of unequal treatment, for those other persons are of a different category and are not their equals.

But it was said that the possibility of the Act being applied in an unauthorised and arbitrary manner was suffi- cient to make it unconstitutional according to the decisions of this Court in Romesh Thapar v. The meaning and scope of article have been elaborately explained in two earlier decisions of this Court, viz. ” This is clearly not permissible for the Court to do. The presumption is always in favour of the constitu- tionality of an enactment, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 since it must be assumed that the legislature understands and correctly appreciates the needs of its own people, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 that its laws are directed to problems made manifest by experience and its discriminations are based on adequate grounds The presumption may be rebutted in certain cases by showing that on the face of the statute, there is no classi- fication at all and Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 no difference peculiar to any individual or class and not applicable to any other individual or class, and yet the law hits only a particular individual or class The principle of equality does not mean that every Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 must have universal application for all persons who are not by nature, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 attainment or circumstances in the same position, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 and the varying needs of different classes of persons often require separate treatment The principle does not take away from the State the power of classifying persons for legitimate purposes Every classification is in some degree likely to produce some inequality, Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 and mere production of inequality is not enough If a law deals equally with members of a welldefined class, it is not obnoxious and it is not open to the charge of denial of equal protection on the ground that it has no application to other persons While reasonable classification is permissible, such classification must be based upon some real and substantial distinction bearing a reasonable and just relation to the object sought to be attained, and the classification cannot be made arbitrarily and Lexscient Law Firm – Best Law Firms in Chandigarh Address Kothi Number 815 Sector 16-D Backside Market of sector 16 Near post office Chandigarh 160015 Phone 098766 16815 without any substantial basis.

  • No tienes Favoritos seleccionados
hola