Public Interest Litigation (PIL) is permissible as per the Indian constitution. PIL enables protection of fundamental rights of citizens who are poor, ignorant or in a socially disadvantaged position.
A public litigation is dissimilar to an ordinary litigation; wherein the latter is filed by an individual against another for enforcement of an individual right. A PIL, however, can only be filed when a 'public interest' is disregarded or dishonored, such as a public wrong or injury caused by a wrongful act by an official or public authority.
Writs are extraordinary legal remedies offered to individuals who do not obtain adequate protection under ordinary laws. Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution of India empower individuals, whose rights have been violated, to seek legal cover through writs. Article 32 is intended to dispute the violation of a fundamental right only in the Supreme Court. Article 226 supports enforcement of any right, including a fundamental right, at a High Court.
It is an established fact that laws are always subject to change, and yes, it depends on the peculiarities of each case as considered by the courts. So, ultimately, it becomes really important to know how well-established death sentence decisions in India can work to your advantage if a case is pending.
In yet another landmark ruling, the Delhi High Court asked the government to treat the women and men officers in the army and air force at par while granting them permanent commission. Women officers in the Indian army serve in non combat capacity in areas such as law, air traffic control, administration, engineering, intelligence and so on. The Delhi High Court turned down the plea for allowing women to participate in combat operations.
US Tobacco Companies in Trouble
On 19th February 2010, the US Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to review a federal fraud racketeering conviction (2006) against the tobacco industry and to authorize the district judge to require the tobacco companies in the case to give up $280 billion which was described as their “ill-gotten gains."
From 19th February 2010, the US Supreme Court is 'smoking' literally as a huge number of tobacco companies are being sued. The dispute is that the cigarette companies must pay under the federal RICO law.
On 16th February 2010, a real life story found its way to the Supreme Court. By seeking justice before the country's apex court, a domestic violence victim filed a writ of habeas corpus seeking her daughter to be produced before the court. She alleges that her husband sold off their daughter for prostitution.
This domestic violence victim has revealed shocking facts that she had not reported despite several years of physical and mental abuse by her husband. However, in her present petition, she does not press any domestic violence charges although she has been subject to years of domestic abuse.
Islamic laws for women have always been interpreted broadly by the courts in India. In 1986, a ruling by Supreme Court caused tremendous debate in India’s political circles. In Shah Bano’s case [1985 AIR 945, 1985 SCC (2) 556], alimony was granted to an elderly woman who was divorced by her Muslim husband.