Saral Legal: Christian Medical Vellore Association V Union of India

SARAL LEGAL
CHRISTIAN MEDICAL VELLORE ASSOCIATION V UNION OF

INDIA
Uniform NEET examination for admission in the graduate and post

graduate courses of the medical and dental courses doesn't violate
rights of the unaided/aided Minority institutions under Articles 25,
26 and 29(1) of the Constitution.
(Decided on 29-04-2020 Supreme Court)
PANDURANG GANAPATI CHAUGALE V VISHWAS RAO MURGUD

COOPERATIVE BANK LIMITED
The cooperative Banks under the state legislation and multistate

cooperative Banks are Bank under section 2(1)(c) of the SARFAESI
ACT 2002. And since recovery is an essential part of banking
therefore the procedure prescribed under section 13 of the
SARFAESI ACT is applicable to them.
(Decided on 5-05-2020 Supreme Court Five Judge Bench)
[SARFAESI ACT Applicable to Cooperative banks.
STATE OF GOA V FAUZIYA IMTIYAZ SHAIKH *

Appointment of government officials as Election Commisioner "a
mockery of the Constitutional Mandate".
FOLLOW SARAL LEGAL ON INSTAGRAM Page 1

SARAL LEGAL
[All State Election Commissioners appointed under Article 243K in

the length and breadth of India have to be independent persons
who cannot be persons who are occupying a post or office under the
Central or any State Government.]
KRISHNA LAL CHAWLA V STATE OF UP
Curtailing vexatious litigation is a crucial step towards a more

effective justice system, a step that cannot be taken without active
involvement of the lower judiciary.
[“The Trial Judge has a duty under the Constitution and the CrPC,
to identify and dispose of frivolous litigation at an early stage by
exercising, substantially and to the fullest extent, the powers
conferred on him.”]
AFZAL ANSARI V STATE OF UP
Azan may be an essential and integral part of Islam but recitation

of Azan through loud- speakers or other sound amplifying devices
cannot be said to be an integral part of the religion, warranting
protection of the fundamental right enshrined under Article 25 of
the Constitution of India.

SARAL LEGAL
(Allahabad High Court 15-05-2020)
PARAMVIR SINGH SAINI V BALJIT SINGH *
Installation and recording of CCTV camera's mandatory in

interrogation rooms of any authority to protect the victim from any
violation of human rights.
(Order Dated 16-07-2020)
EXL CAREERS V. FRANKFINN AVIATION SERVICES PVT. LTD
The Supreme Court held that if a plaint is returned under Order VII
Rule 10 and 10A of CPC, for presentation in the court in which it
should have been instituted, the plaint is to be considered as a
fresh plaint and the trial is to be conducted de novo.
VINEETA SHARMA V RAKESH SHARMA
The Court has held that daughters have right in coparcenary by

birth and that it is not necessary that the father coparcener should

SARAL LEGAL
be living when the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 came

into force.
DECCAN PAPER MILLS CO. LTD. V. REGENCY MAHAVIR

PROPERTIES
Action instituted under section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963

not an action in rem.
The Court held that the proceeding under section 31 is with

reference to specific persons and not with reference to all who may
be concerned with the property underlying the instrument, or “all
the world”.
AMAR SINGH V STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
Evidence has to be weighed and not counted.
The Court can and may act on the testimony of single eye witness
provided he is wholly reliable.

SARAL LEGAL
BIKRAMJIT SINGH V STATE OF PUNJAB
Right to default bail under the first proviso to section 167(2) CrPC
not a mere statutory right but a fundamental right.
Right to default bail a fundamental right granted to an accused

person to be released on bail once the conditions of the first proviso
to section 167(2) are fulfilled.
SATISH CHANDER AHUJA V SNEHA AHUJA
Aggreived wife has right to residence in a shared household of in-

laws.
The court held that an estranged wife is entitled to

the right of residence in a shared household, irrespective of her
having any legal interest in the same or not.

SARAL LEGAL
SKILL LOTTO SOLUTIONS V. UNION OF INDIA
The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of imposition

of GST on lotteries, betting and gambling.
RAHNA JALAL V. STATE OF KERALA
There is no bar on granting anticipatory bail for an offence

committed under the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on
Marriage) Act 2019, provided that the competent court must hear
the married Muslim woman who has made the complaint before
granting the anticipatory bail.
SATISH V STATE OF MAHARASHTRA *
The Court expressed that if there is no physical contact i.e. skin to

skin with sexual intent without penetration then the said would not
amount to sexual assault under POCSO Act but Section 354 IPC.

SARAL LEGAL
The Supreme Court stayed this judgement in the case of Attorney

General for India v Satish.
(Decided on 19-01-2021 Bombay High Court)
KHUSHI RAM V NAWAL SINGH
Heirs of a married woman on paternal side are not strangers. She

can enter in family settlement with them.
The court has held that when heirs of father of a female are
included as person who can possibly succeed, it cannot be held that
they are strangers and not the members of the family qua the
female under section 15(1) of the Hindu Succession Act 1956.
BHIMA RAJU PRASAD V STATE
The Court has held that Section 195(1)(b)(i) CrPC will not bar
prosecution by the investigating agency for offence punishable

SARAL LEGAL
under Section 193 IPC, which is committed during the stage of

investigation. This is provided that the investigating agency has
lodged complaint or registered the case under Section 193, IPC
prior to commencement of proceedings and production of such
evidence before the trial court. In such circumstance, the same
would not be considered an offence committed in, or in relation to,
any proceeding in any Court for the purpose of Section 195(1)(b)(i)
CrPC.
KRISHNA LAL CHAWLA V STATE OF UP
Curtailing vexatious litigation is a crucial step towards a more

effective justice system, a step that cannot be taken without active
involvement of the lower judiciary.
“The Trial Judge has a duty under the Constitution and the CrPC,
to identify and dispose of frivolous litigation at an early stage by
exercising, substantially and to the fullest extent, the powers
conferred on him.”

SARAL LEGAL
SATBIR SINGH V STATE OF HARYANA
When the legislature used the words, “soon before” they did not
mean “immediately before”. Rather, they left its determination in
the hands of the courts.”
“What is pivotal to the above determination is the establishment of

a “proximate and live link” between the cruelty and the
consequential death of the victim.”
Q.1
"The legislature does not always say everything on the subject.

When it enacts a law, every conceivable eventuality which may arise
in the future may not be present to the mind of the lawmaker.
Legislative silences create spaces for creativity. Between interstices
of legislative spaces and silences, the law is shaped by the robust
application of common sense."
In which case it was stated by Justice D Y Chandrachud??
Ans- Union of India v G S Chatha Rice Mills
[In this case it was held that the precise time of publication of E-
Gazette significant to determine the enforceability of notifications. ]

SARAL LEGAL
Q. 2
"The Makers of the Constitution were fully conscious of the

unfortunate position of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled
Tribes. To them equality, liberty and fraternity are but a dream; an
ideal guaranteed by the law, but far too distant to reach; far too
illusory to touch. These backward people and others in like
positions of helplessness are the favoured children of the
Constitution. It is for them that ameliorative and remedial measures
are adopted to achieve the end of equality. To permit those who are
not intended to be so specially protected to compete for reservation
is to dilute the protection and defeat the very constitutional aim." In
which case these remarks were made by Supreme Court Judge S
Ravindra Bhat?
Ans- Prathvi Raj Chauhan v Union Of India
(Decided on 10-02-2020 Supreme Court upheld the constitutional

validity of the SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Amendment Act,
2018
Q.3 *
"Any regulation framed in the national interest must necessarily

apply to all educational institutions, whether run by the majority or

SARAL LEGAL
the minority. Such a limitation must necessarily be read into Article

30. The right under Article 30(1) cannot be such as to override the
national interest or to prevent the Government from framing
regulations in that behalf. It is, of course, true that government
regulations cannot destroy the minority character of the institution
or make the right to establish and administer a mere illusion; but
the right under Article 30 is not so absolute as to be above the law."
Justice U Lalit made remarks in reference to which case ?
Ans- Sk. Md. Rafique v. Managing Committee, Contai

Rahamania High Madrasah
Q.4 *
"Liberty across human eras is as tenuous as tenuous can be.

Liberty survives by the vigilance of her citizens, on the cacophony of
the media and in the dusty corridors of courts alive to the rule of
(and not by) law. Yet, much too often, liberty is a casualty when
one of these components is found wanting." In which justice D Y
Chandrachud made these remarks?
Ans- Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. State of Maharashtra

SARAL LEGAL
[Law should not become a ruse for targetted harassment.]
Q.5
The Court has unanimously ruled that the protection granted to a

person under Section 438 Cr.PC should not invariably be limited to
a fixed period; it should be in favour of the accused without any
restriction on time.
The life or duration of an anticipatory bail order does not end

normally at the time and stage when the accused is summoned by
the court, or when charges are framed, but can continue till the end
of the trial.
A) Sushila Aggarwal v State of NCT of Delhi
B) Amar Singh v State (NCT of Delhi)
C) Bikramjit Singh v State of Punjab
D) Bhima Raju Prasad v State
Ans- Sushila Aggarwal v State of NCT of Delhi
(Decided on 29-01-2020 Supreme Court five Judge Bench)
[No time limit could be fixed while granting anticipatory bail.]

SARAL LEGAL
Q.6 *
In which case the Supreme Court held that the “Not being bound to
provide reservations, the state is not required to justify its decision
on the basis of quantifiable data, showing that there is adequate
representation of members of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled
Tribes in state services”?
a) B. K. Pavitra v Union of India
b) Christian Medical Vellore Association v Union of India
c) Sk. Md. Rafique V Managing Committee Contai Rahmania High

Madarsah
d) Mukesh Kumar v State of Uttarakhand
Ans- Mukesh kumar V State of Uttarakhand
Q.7
In which case the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the West
Bengal Madarsah Service Commission Act, 2008 that provides for
setting up of a Commission for the purpose of appointing teachers
in the Government aided madarsas in the state? And as per that
judgment the Minority educational institutions which are aided by
the Government can’t claim the absolute right to appoint teachers.
A) B K Pavitra v Union of India

SARAL LEGAL
B) Christian Medical Vellore Association v Union of India
C) SK Md. Rafique v Managing Committee Contai Rahmania High

Madarsah
D) Mukesh Kumar V State of Uttarakhand
Ans- SK Md. Rafique v Managing Committee Contai Rahmania

High Madarsah
Q.8 *
Supreme Court has held the 100% reservation provided by the

State Government to the Scheduled Tribe candidates out of whom
33.1/3% shall be women for the post of teachers in the schools in
the scheduled areas in the State, unconstitutional. The court
further held that "there was no rhyme or reason with the State
Government to resort to 100% reservation". This was held in the
case of
A) Laxmibai Chandaragi v State of Karnataka
B) B K Pavitra v Union Of India
C) Chebrolu Leela prasad Rao and ors v State of Andhra Pradesh
D) Prathvi Raj Chauhan v Union Of India

SARAL LEGAL
Ans- Chebrolu Leela prasad Rao and ors v State of Andhra

Pradesh
(Decided on 22-04-2020 Supreme Court, Five Judge Bench)
[Government order providing 100% reservation for tribal teachers in

Scheduled areas unconstitutional]
Q.9 *
In which case the Constitution Bench held that the Medical Council
of India (MCI) has no power to make any reservation for in-service
candidates in postgraduate medical courses in states and that only
States are allowed to grant such reservation.
A) Christian Medical Vellore Association v Union Of India
B) Tamilnadu Medical Officers Association and ors v Union Of India
C) B K Pavitra v Union Of India
D) Laxmibai Chandaragi v State of Karnataka
Ans- Tamilnadu Medical Officers Association and ors v Union Of

India
(Decided on 31-08-2020 Supreme Court Five Judge Bench)

SARAL LEGAL
Q.10
In which case the supreme court has held that an unmarried Hindu
daughter can claim maintenance from her father till she is married
and unable to maintain herself, relying on Section 20(3) of
the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956?
Ans- Abhilasha v Prakash
[Section 125 CrPC is narrower concept purpose of which is to

provide immediate relief to the applicant whereas right under
section 20 of 1956 Act is a larger and broader concept.]
Q.11 *
In which case the Supreme Court has held that the Speaker of the
Legislative Assembly should decide on a petition seeking
disqualification of a member under the Tenth Schedule of the
Constitution within a period of three months, in the absence of
exceptional reasons?
Ans- Keisham Meghachandra v The Hon'ble Speaker Manipur

Legislative Assembly & ors.

SARAL LEGAL
Q.12
It shall be mandatory for political parties [at the Central and State
election level] to upload on their website, newspaper and their social
media platforms detailed information regarding candidates with
pending criminal cases within 48 hours of selection of the candidate
or within two weeks of nomination, whichever is earlier.
In which case the Supreme Court has issued these directions?
Ans- Rambabu Singh Thakur v Sunil Arora and ors.
FOLLOW SARAL LEGAL ON INSTAGRAM FOR JUDICIARY, CLAT

PG AND OTHER LAW EXAMS FOR LATEST JUDGMENTS, MCQs
ETC (IN HINDI AND ENGLISH BOTH)

Saral Legal: Christian Medical Vellore Association V Union of India

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Saral Legal: Christian Medical Vellore Association V Union of India

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SARAL LEGAL

CHRISTIAN MEDICAL VELLORE ASSOCIATION V UNION OF

Uniform NEET examination for admission in the graduate and post

(Decided on 29-04-2020 Supreme Court)

PANDURANG GANAPATI CHAUGALE V VISHWAS RAO MURGUD

The cooperative Banks under the state legislation and multistate

(Decided on 5-05-2020 Supreme Court Five Judge Bench)

[SARFAESI ACT Applicable to Cooperative banks.

STATE OF GOA V FAUZIYA IMTIYAZ SHAIKH *

FOLLOW SARAL LEGAL ON INSTAGRAM Page 1

[All State Election Commissioners appointed under Article 243K in

(Decided on 12-03-2021 Supreme Court)

KRISHNA LAL CHAWLA V STATE OF UP

Curtailing vexatious litigation is a crucial step towards a more

(Decided on 08-03-2021 Supreme Court)

AFZAL ANSARI V STATE OF UP

Azan may be an essential and integral part of Islam but recitation

FOLLOW SARAL LEGAL ON INSTAGRAM Page 2

(Allahabad High Court 15-05-2020)

PARAMVIR SINGH SAINI V BALJIT SINGH *

Installation and recording of CCTV camera's mandatory in

(Order Dated 16-07-2020)

EXL CAREERS V. FRANKFINN AVIATION SERVICES PVT. LTD

(Decided on 05-08-2020 Supreme Court)

VINEETA SHARMA V RAKESH SHARMA

The Court has held that daughters have right in coparcenary by

FOLLOW SARAL LEGAL ON INSTAGRAM Page 3

be living when the Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 came

(Decided on 11-08-2020 Supreme Court)

DECCAN PAPER MILLS CO. LTD. V. REGENCY MAHAVIR

Action instituted under section 31 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963

The Court held that the proceeding under section 31 is with

(Decided on 19-08-2020 Supreme Court)

AMAR SINGH V STATE (NCT OF DELHI)

Evidence has to be weighed and not counted.

(Decided on 12-10-2020 Supreme Court)

FOLLOW SARAL LEGAL ON INSTAGRAM Page 4

BIKRAMJIT SINGH V STATE OF PUNJAB

Right to default bail a fundamental right granted to an accused

(Decided on 12-10-2020 Supreme Court)

SATISH CHANDER AHUJA V SNEHA AHUJA

Aggreived wife has right to residence in a shared household of in-

The court held that an estranged wife is entitled to

(Decided on 15-10-2020 Supreme Court)

FOLLOW SARAL LEGAL ON INSTAGRAM Page 5

SKILL LOTTO SOLUTIONS V. UNION OF INDIA

The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of imposition

(Decided on 3-12-2020 Supreme Court)

RAHNA JALAL V. STATE OF KERALA

There is no bar on granting anticipatory bail for an offence

(Decided on 17-12-2020 Supreme Court)

SATISH V STATE OF MAHARASHTRA *

The Court expressed that if there is no physical contact i.e. skin to

FOLLOW SARAL LEGAL ON INSTAGRAM Page 6

The Supreme Court stayed this judgement in the case of Attorney

(Decided on 19-01-2021 Bombay High Court)

KHUSHI RAM V NAWAL SINGH

Heirs of a married woman on paternal side are not strangers. She

(Decided on 22-02-2021 Supreme Court)

BHIMA RAJU PRASAD V STATE

FOLLOW SARAL LEGAL ON INSTAGRAM Page 7

under Section 193 IPC, which is committed during the stage of

(Decided on 12-03-2021 Supreme Court)