Thursday, May 27, 2010

Comments on premarital sex: SC quashes cases against Khushboo

Objection overruled

V. VENKATESAN
in New Delhi

The Supreme Court quashes all criminal cases against actor Khushboo for her comments on premarital sex.

S.R. RAGHUNATHAN
A protest in Chennai in 2005 by members of the Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi against Khushboo's remarks.

THE recent judgment of the Supreme Court in S. Khushboo vs Kanniammal is a signal contribution to the jurisprudence on free speech. The Bench comprising Chief Justice of India K.G. Balakrishnan and Justices Deepak Verma and B.S. Chauhan, on April 28, quashed all 22 criminal proceedings pending against the Tamil film actor Khushboo – in various courts in Tamil Nadu and one in Indore, Madhya Pradesh – in connection with her remarks on premarital sex.

To understand the significance of this judgment, it is necessary to explain the acronym SLAPP. A strategic lawsuit against public participation (SLAPP) aims to intimidate and silence critics by compelling them to join a legal battle and restrain them from expressing a view similar to the one that invited the SLAPP.

Coined by University of Denver professors Penelope Canan and George W. Pring, and explained by them in their book The Slapps: Getting Sued for Speaking Out (1996), the term refers to vexatious litigation resorted to by a petitioner solely to harass or subdue the defendant. The petitioners, in such cases, know their complaint has no merit. Yet, they achieve their objectives if the defendants submit to intimidation.

In many cases, the victim of a SLAPP suit may not have the resources to put up a defence, in view of the mounting legal costs, if the petitioner persists with the petition. As a result, an apology or retreat is seen as a viable option for the defendant. It is worrying that the number of SLAPP suits is on the rise in India.

Khushboo was undeterred by the cost of fighting the case, first before the Madras High Court and later before the Supreme Court. But even she had to retreat from her initial comments on premarital sex, made in the course of an interview she gave to India Today magazine in September 2005, when the Tamil daily Dina Thanthi reproduced it along with her defence.

India Today had conducted a survey on sexual habits of people residing in Indian cities. Increasing incidence of premarital sex was an issue in that survey. Khushboo was one of those who spoke to the magazine on this issue. She noted the increasing incidence of premarital sex in the context of live-in relationships and qualified her remarks by observing that girls should take adequate precautions to prevent unwanted pregnancies and the transmission of venereal diseases.

The interview was reproduced in Dina Thanthi, which also carried Khushboo's purported defence, following protests against the interview from certain sections of society. Khushboo later denied the 'defence' as carried in Dina Thanthi and asked the newspaper to publish her denial prominently to avoid legal action against it, even though the Supreme Court found nothing objectionable. But the denial was insufficient to activists of Pattali Makkal Katchi (PMK), who comprised most of the SLAPP petitioners against Khushboo.

Most of the complainants argued that the views Khushboo expressed in the interview were punishable under the Indian Penal Code's (IPC) provisions dealing with obscenity, defamation, intentional insult to provoke breach of peace, statements conducive to public mischief, and words, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman and under the Act that prohibits indecent representation of women.

Khushboo first approached the Madras High Court to quash all the criminal proceedings instituted against her. In its judgment on April 30, 2008, the High Court refused to quash the proceedings by exercising its inherent powers but directed that all the criminal proceedings be consolidated and tried by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Egmore, Chennai. However, the High Court condemned premarital sex and live-in relationships, and this was seen to have prejudiced the trial. Khushboo appealed against the High Court's judgment in the Supreme Court.

In its judgment, the Supreme Court reminded the High Court that one of its paramount duties was to see that a person who was apparently innocent was not subjected to prosecution and humiliation on the basis of false and wholly untenable complaints. The Supreme Court held that none of the alleged offences of Khushboo survived when one examined the facts of the case. The High Court could have exercised judicial review to prevent a miscarriage of justice or to correct some grave errors that might have been committed by the subordinate courts, it held.

Specifically, the Supreme Court Bench pointed out that the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986, was enacted to punish publishers and advertisers who knowingly disseminate materials that portray women in an indecent manner. Khushboo merely referred to premarital sex in her statement which was published by India Today and Dina Thanthi. It would, therefore, defy logic to invoke the Act against her when she was not an advertiser or publisher by any means, the Bench held.

Section 509 of the IPC criminalises a word, gesture or act intended to insult the modesty of a woman and in order to establish this offence it is necessary to show that the modesty of a particular woman or a readily identifiable group of women has been insulted by a spoken word, gesture or physical act. Khushboo's views appeared in a written form, the court pointed out, thus ruling out the application of this provision against her.

Khushboo did not speak on behalf of any group, nor was her statement directed against a particular group. Therefore, Section 153A of the IPC, which makes promoting enmity between different groups an offence, did not apply to this case, the court said.

Section 292 (1) of the IPC states that the publication of a book, pamphlet, paper, writing, drawing, painting, representation, figure, etc., will be deemed obscene if it is lascivious (that is, expressing or causing sexual desire) or appeals to the prurient interest (that is, excessive interest in sexual matters), or if its effect tends to deprave and corrupt persons who are likely to read, see, or hear the matter contained in such materials.

Citing a previous ruling of the Supreme Court, the Bench said that if a mere reference to sex by itself is considered obscene, no books can be sold except those which are purely religious. The test is whether a class of persons into whose hands the book, article or story falls will suffer in their moral outlook or become depraved by reading it or might have impure and lecherous thoughts aroused in their minds.

Citing other decisions of the courts, the Bench said obscenity should be gauged with respect to contemporary community standards that reflected the sensibilities as well as the tolerance levels of an average reasonable person. Khushboo did not describe any sexual act or say anything that could arouse sexual desires in the mind of a reasonable and prudent reader. Her interview prompts a dialogue within society, wherein people can choose either to defend or to question the existing social mores, the Bench observed.

All that Khushboo did was to urge societal acceptance of the increasing instances of premarital sex when both partners were committed to each other, the court pointed out. That, it said, could not be construed as an open endorsement of sexual activities of all kinds. Even if it were to be assumed that her statements could encourage some people to engage in premarital sex, no legal injury had been shown since the latter was not an offence, the court explained.

S.S. KUMAR
Actor Khushboo, a file picture.

When adults willingly engage in sexual relations outside the marital setting, no statutory offence takes place unless it is adultery, as defined under Section 497 of the IPC. The court referred to its decision in Lata Singh vs State of U.P. (2006) and reiterated that a live-in relationship between two consenting adults of heterogenic sex did not amount to any offence (with the obvious exception of adultery), even though it might be perceived as immoral.

The Bench supported the reasoning behind decisions by other courts that the context in which, and the purpose for which, reference to sex had been made should be understood fully.

The Bench said Section 499 of the IPC seeking to punish defamation was not attracted in this case because neither did Khushboo intend to cause harm to the reputation of the complainants nor could we discern any actual harm done to their reputation because of her remarks. Nowhere had she suggested that all women in Tamil Nadu engaged in premarital sex. It was a clear case of the complainants reading too much into her remarks, the Bench said.

Section 199 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) mandates that a magistrate can take cognisance of defamation only upon receiving a complaint from a person who is aggrieved. This limitation on the power discourages the filing of frivolous complaints. As Khushboo's remarks were not directed at any individual or a readily identifiable group of people, the complainants could not be aggrieved persons, the court suggested.

The results of India Today's survey showed that 26 per cent of respondents did not think that it was necessary for women to retain their virginity until the time of marriage. The Bench said Khushboo was not alone in expressing such a view, even though it might be unpopular or contrary to mainstream social practices. Even if her remarks caused mental agony to some sections of women in Tamil Nadu, there was no prima facie case for any offence, the Bench held.

It held that the institution of the numerous criminal complaints against Khushboo was done in a mala fide manner, as almost all the complainants were associated with the PMK. In such cases, the Bench said, the task of criminal law was not to punish individuals merely for expressing unpopular views. The threshold for placing reasonable restrictions on the freedom of speech and expression was indeed a very high one, and there should be a presumption in favour of the accused in such cases. One should be mindful that the initiation of a criminal trial was a process that carried an implicit degree of coercion and it should not be triggered by false and frivolous complaints, which amounted to harassment of and humiliation to the accused, the Bench explained.

The Bench's observations on the need to tolerate unpopular views in the socio-cultural space are significant. While maintaining that the free flow of opinions and ideas was essential to sustain the collective life of the citizenry, the Bench said people should keep their minds open to the fact that there were individuals or groups who held that sex outside marriage was normal.

Notions of social morality were inherently subjective and criminal law could not be used as a means to interfere unduly with the domain of personal autonomy. The complainants, instead of resorting to legal means, should have contested her views through the news media or any other public platform. Law should not be used in a manner that had chilling effects on the freedom of speech and expression, the court held.

The complainants against Khushboo might have lost the case in the Supreme Court, but they did achieve their purpose of harassing her with the case for five years and silencing her and others with similar views.

The Supreme Court's judgment, therefore, must form an important precedent to be followed by the lower courts when they are called upon to institute frivolous cases against individuals merely for expressing unpopular views.

Courtesy_

http://www.flonnet.com

For FULL Judgment of Chennai HC and SC as follows:

Chennai HC:

S.Khusboo Vs. Kanniammal on 30 April, 2008:

http://indiankanoon.org/doc/761199/

Supreme Court:

S. Khushboo Vs. Kanniammal & another on 28 April, 2010:

http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1327342/


No comments:

Post a Comment

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Search our Blog here

Google
 

Compiled by

Disclaimer


This Blog Spot is meant for publishing landmark judgments pronounced by the Court of law as we collected from the renowned Dailies, Magazines, etc., so as to create an awareness to the general public and also to keep it as a ready reckoner by them. As such the readers may extend their gratitude towards the Original Author as we quoted at the bottom of each Post under the title "Courtesy/Sources". Furthermore, the Blog Authors are no way responsible for the correctness of the materials published herein and the readers may verify the concerned valuable sources.



Followers

Dinamalar | Court News Feed

Dinakaran | Crime News Feed

Labels

Madras High Court (226) supreme court (157) Supreme Court (96) Madurai Bench (60) Advocate (44) High Court (44) tamil nadu (42) Indian Kanoon (41) Delhi High Court (37) Education (31) Divorce (30) Pondicherry (30) Husband (28) Wife (28) consumer forum (23) Lawyers (22) Cr.P.C. (20) Maintenance (20) police (20) Consumer (19) 2013 (16) Judges (16) article (16) the hindu (16) Matrimonial case (15) Hindu Marriage Act (14) Bank (13) Cruelty (13) IPC (13) karnataka high court (13) AIADMK (12) Compensation (12) Criminal cases (12) Jayalalithaa (12) dmk (12) Bar Council of India (11) CJI (11) School (11) Woman (11) election (11) Accident cases (10) Child (10) Kerala High Court (10) Marriage (10) dinamani (10) election commission (10) insurance (10) medical (10) Labour cases (9) MV ACT CASES (9) Madurai (9) Mobile Phone (9) doctors (9) evidence (9) pil (9) tamil nadu bar council (9) tax (9) taxation (9) Cell Phone (8) Examination (8) Frontline (8) Loans (8) Magistrate (8) Rent Control Act (8) State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (8) Allahabad high court (7) Bar Council (7) Constitution (7) Domestic Violence Act (7) Gujarat High Court (7) Negligence (7) Reservation Quota (7) Tenant Landlord (7) bombay high court (7) court (7) new delhi (7) 2012 (6) Andhra Pradesh High Court (6) Civil Judge (6) Complaint (6) Consumer National Commission (6) Dowry (6) Employee (6) Justice G. Rajasuria (6) Muslims (6) Negotiable Instruments Act (6) Notification (6) Railway (6) USA (6) arbitration (6) compassionate (6) madras (6) rape (6) rulings (6) sex (6) Airlines (5) Andhra Pradesh (5) College (5) Delay (5) Employer (5) FIR (5) Judgment (5) Karunanidhi (5) Labour Court (5) Madras Family Court (5) Mumbai High Court (5) President (5) Rajiv Gandhi (5) Recruitment (5) Sethusamudram ship canal (5) Student (5) TRAI (5) advertisement (5) appointment (5) deficiency of service (5) editorial (5) fined (5) 2014 (4) BSNL (4) Bigamy (4) CBI (4) Cheque Dishonour Cases (4) Chief Minister of Pondicherry (4) Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu (4) Civil Matters (4) Commissioner of Police (4) Corruption (4) Daughter (4) Death penalty (4) Father (4) Fees (4) Foreigners Act (4) Gazette (4) Hindu (4) Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act (4) Hospitals (4) Judiciary (4) Justice G.Rajasuria (4) Life Imprisonment (4) Matrimonial House (4) Ministry of Law (4) Minor Child (4) Parents (4) Private Schools (4) RTI Act (4) Ram Sethu project (4) Sexual exploitation (4) Suspension (4) Teachers (4) Tenant (4) Transfer (4) contempt (4) delhi (4) hindustan times (4) karnataka (4) pmk (4) registration department (4) times of india (4) us (4) Actor (3) Adoption (3) Aircraft (3) Assassination (3) Ban (3) Bank Cases (3) CJ (3) Calcutta High Court (3) Cheque (3) Computer (3) Copyright (3) Court Fees (3) Dinakaran (3) Disqualification (3) Electricity (3) Encroachers (3) Eviction (3) Full Bench Decision (3) HC Advocate Karunanidhi.R (3) Human Rights (3) Human Rights Commission (3) IT Act (3) Income Tax (3) Justice Ashok Kumar (3) Landlord (3) Law Firms (3) Limitation Act (3) Medicos (3) Motor Vehicle (3) Murder case (3) Muslim (3) NDNC (3) Panchayats Act (3) Patent (3) Prisoner (3) Proterty Act (3) Public Property (3) Punishment (3) RTE Act (3) Ragging (3) Salaries (3) Selection (3) Smoking (3) Strikes (3) Subramanian Swamy (3) Telephone (3) Theft (3) Villupuram (3) Websites (3) Wikipedia (3) Witness (3) Woman Lawyers (3) Workman (3) Youtube (3) girl (3) helmet (3) parliament (3) software (3) stamp act (3) 2007 (2) 5-Judges Bench (2) 99th Constitutional Amendment (2) Aadhaar Card (2) Abortion (2) Absence (2) Acquittal (2) Agitating (2) Agriculture (2) Airport (2) Airtel (2) Amendments (2) Apple (2) Arrest (2) Assault (2) BCCI (2) BCI (2) Britain (2) CBSE (2) CIC (2) CNN IBN (2) CPC (2) CTC (2) Chenai Corporation (2) Child Marriage Act (2) Child Witness (2) Cigarette (2) Citizenship (2) Code of Civil procedure (2) Coimbatore (2) Collector (2) Collegium systems (2) Companies Act (2) Complainant (2) Congress (2) Constitution Bench (2) Cr.P.C (2) Credit Card (2) DNA Test (2) Damages (2) Date of Birth (2) Dayanidhi Maran (2) District Judges (2) Driving Licence (2) Drugs (2) EVMs (2) Enrolment (2) Evening Court (2) Exam Marks (2) Eye-witness (2) Family (2) Family Court (2) Foreign Law Firms (2) Freedom Fighters (2) Fundamental Rights (2) Google (2) Governors (2) Grave crimes (2) Habeas Corpus (2) Haldiram (2) Health Ministry (2) High Courts (2) Himachal Pradesh High Court (2) ICICI (2) ID Act (2) Impeachment (2) Inspector General of Registration (2) Inter-caste (2) Interest (2) Interim Injunction (2) Interim Orders (2) International Arbitration (2) International Court of Justice (2) Internet (2) Job (2) Justice (2) Justice A.K.Ganguly (2) Justice Dinakaran (2) LPG (2) LTTE (2) Law Commission (2) Law Department (2) Lok Adalat (2) MPs (2) Madhya Pradesh High Court (2) Maharashtra (2) Mark Sheets (2) Medi-claim (2) Men (2) Microsoft (2) Municipal Post (2) Municipal Waste (2) Municipality (2) NJAC (2) Nagapattinam (2) Nalini (2) National Highways (2) Nuke Deal (2) Obscenity (2) PTI (2) Patient (2) Patna High Court (2) Penalty (2) Pension (2) Police Reforms Committee (2) Poll freebies (2) Power of Attorney (2) Pregnant (2) Prevention of Corruption Act (2) Prime Minister (2) Property (2) Public Meetings (2) Punjab High Court (2) Punjab and Haryana High Court (2) RBI (2) Registrar (2) Registration Act (2) Release (2) Reserve Bank of India (2) Retired benefits (2) Review (2) Rigorous imprisonment (2) Road (2) SBI (2) SC/ST (2) SHRC (2) Sale (2) Samacheer Kalvi (2) Sanjay Dutt (2) Self-defence (2) Sikkim (2) Sonia Gandhi (2) State Bar Concil (2) State Govts. (2) TADA (2) TNEB (2) Tamil New Year Act (2) Temples (2) Tobacco firms (2) Trafficking (2) University (2) Video (2) Vigilance (2) Vodafone (2) Wages (2) Water (2) West Bengal (2) Woman Judges (2) backlog of cases (2) bail (2) customs duty (2) laptops (2) legislature (2) practitioners (2) service (2) service tax (2) sessions judge (2) tiruchi (2) 100 RUPEE (1) 11 weeks imprisonment (1) 18 Years (1) 2001 (1) 2006 (1) 2009 (1) 2011 (1) 2015 (1) 2016 (1) 5 Judges Bench (1) 6th Pay Scale (1) AIIMS (1) Aadal Paadal (1) Aadhar Card (1) Abuse (1) Accountable (1) Act (1) Adjournments (1) Adverse possession (1) Advocate Cyril Mathias Vincent (1) Advocate M.Kumaran (1) Advocate M.S.Maruthupandiyan (1) Advocate P.S.Amalraj (1) Advocates' Welfare Fund Act (1) Agreement (1) Air India (1) Alien Species (1) Allahabad (1) Allergy (1) Allopathy (1) Amusement parks (1) Anbumani Ramadoss (1) Answer Sheets (1) Apartments (1) Appearance (1) Arguments (1) Arrears (1) Arunachal Pradesh (1) Ashok Kumar (1) Assembly Speaker (1) Assets case (1) Association (1) Attendance (1) Attention Please (1) Auditors (1) Australia (1) Autopsy (1) Ayodhya (1) BJP (1) Babri Masjid (1) Baby (1) Baggage missing (1) Bank Account (1) Banners (1) Bar Association (1) Bar Council of Tamil Nadu (1) Batco Roadways' case (1) Bhavani Singh (1) Bhopal gas tragedy (1) Bhullar's mercy plea (1) Big TV (1) Bihar (1) Bihar Prohibition Act (1) Bill (1) Biscuits (1) Black Sea (1) Bofors case (1) Bonus (1) Boycott (1) Brain-mapping (1) Brothers (1) Burqa (1) Buses (1) Business Line (1) Bye-laws (1) CAT (1) CEC (1) CITY CIVIL COURT (1) CTV (1) Calcutta (1) Cambodian (1) Camera (1) Canada (1) Cargo Ship (1) Caste (1) Cauvery (1) Cauvery Tribunal Award (1) Censor Board (1) Central Crime Branch (1) Certificates (1) Chennai (South) Forum (1) Chhattisgarh State Bar Council (1) Chief Judicial Magistrate (1) Chief Justices of India (1) Christian (1) Civic Election (1) Civic Elections (1) Common facilities Block (1) Commonwealth Games Panel (1) Communal harmony (1) Compounding Offences (1) Condoms (1) Contract labour (1) Conversion Formula (1) Cooperative Societies (1) Copying (1) Corporation (1) Cosmetic (1) Costumes (1) Court Buildings (1) Creche (1) Cricket (1) Criminalisation (1) Culcutta High Court (1) Current Tamil Nadu Cases (1) Custodial death (1) DGP (1) DK (1) DMDK (1) DRT (1) Dalits (1) Dasavatharam (1) Daughter-in-law (1) Death (1) Debarring (1) Deccan (1) Defamation (1) Defaulters (1) Degree (1) Departmental Enquiry (1) Derogatory remarks (1) Desertion (1) Designation (1) Destruction (1) Detergent Soap (1) Dharmapuri (1) Directory (1) Disabled person (1) Disconnection (1) Dispensary (1) Don Bosco Matriculation School (1) Don Bosco School (1) Download Links (1) Dozing (1) Dr.Ramadoss (1) Dress Code (1) Driver (1) Drunk driving (1) Dying Declaration (1) EPIC (1) ESI Act (1) EU (1) Education Department (1) Education Loan (1) Elevation (1) Emergency (1) Employment (1) Engineering College (1) Enquiry (1) Entertainment tax (1) Environment (1) European Court (1) Events to Remember (1) Exam Cheaters (1) Exit Polls (1) Experts Committee (1) Expulsion (1) Facebook (1) Fair Criticism (1) False (1) Fat (1) Father's identity (1) Father-in-law (1) Film (1) Fire (1) Flats (1) Flexi Boards (1) Food (1) Framing of Charges (1) France (1) French Civil Code (1) French Regime (1) Fringe Benefit Tax (1) Frivolous Petition (1) GOs (1) Garments (1) Gauhati HC (1) Gender Bias (1) Gingee Court (1) Gingee-TV Malai NH (1) Girlfriend (1) Goa (1) Gondas (1) Goods (1) Goons (1) Government Offices (1) Government Officials (1) Govt. Servants' Conduct Rules (1) Govt. sites (1) Grandchildren (1) Gratuity (1) Green Card (1) Guardian (1) Gubernatorial (1) Gudalur Janmam Estates (1) Guidelines (1) Guilty (1) HC Calendar (1) HIV Patient (1) HRCE Act (1) Hamam Soap (1) Handcuff (1) Haryana (1) Hawkers (1) Heroin (1) Hewlett Packard (1) High Court Bench for Pondicherry (1) Highways (1) Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment (1) Hindu Succession Act (1) Hindus (1) Hindustan Lever Limited (1) Hindustan Unilever Limited (1) Hoardings (1) Holiday Court (1) Holidays (1) Hostel (1) Hutchison Essar (1) Hyderabad (1) ICJ (1) ICSE (1) IMDT Act (1) IPL (1) IT Tax Tribunal (1) Identity Cards (1) Illegitimate (1) Images (1) Immoral (1) Impotent (1) Imprisonment (1) Incest (1) Infiltrators (1) Interest rates (1) Interview (1) Invalid (1) Investigation (1) Invitation (1) Jammu and Kashmir (1) Jats Reservation (1) Jharkhand (1) Journal Section (1) Judicial Discretion (1) Judicial Officers (1) Judicial Staffs (1) Junction (1) Justice A.P.Shah (1) Justice Bhagwati (1) Justice F.M.Ibrahim Kalifulla (1) Justice G Rajasuriya (1) Justice P.Sathasivam (1) Justice Rajasuriya (1) Juvenile Justice Board (1) K.R.Narayanan (1) K.Veeramani (1) KFC (1) Kabil Sibal (1) Kachatheevu (1) Karaikal (1) Katchativu case (1) Kathi (1) Kerala (1) Kerla (1) Khushboo (1) Kidney (1) Kingfisher (1) Kodak (1) LIC (1) Lakes (1) Land Owners (1) Larger Bench (1) Laundry (1) Law College (1) Lawyer Notice (1) Leave (1) Legal Practitioners Act 2010 (1) Leprosy Patient (1) License Fees (1) Lift (1) Links (1) Live-in-relationship (1) Local Bodies (1) Lok Sabha (1) MCOCA (1) MLAs (1) MNC (1) Malaria (1) Malaysian Airlines (1) Malpractice (1) Mangalore Express (1) Manupatra (1) Marriage Registration Certificates (1) Married (1) Mediation (1) Medical College issue (1) Meghalaya (1) Mercy Petition (1) Mizoram (1) Mobile Court (1) Money Lending licence (1) Mosquito Bite (1) Mother (1) Movies (1) Mutual Consent (1) NDPS Act (1) NDTV (1) NH 31A (1) NHRCs (1) NI Act (1) NOTA (1) NPT (1) NRI (1) NSA Act (1) Nagaland (1) Nallathambi (1) Narco Analysis (1) National Taxation Tribunal (1) Natural Justice (1) Navarasu murder case (1) Negative Voting (1) Nepal (1) News Today (1) Nivedita Sharma (1) No-confidence motion (1) Non-Karnataka Vehicles (1) Non-signatory (1) None of the Above (1) Norms (1) North Carolina (1) Notary Public (1) Notifications (1) Nursing College (1) Office Bearers (1) Official Language (1) Oil Companies (1) Online (1) Oral (1) Ordinance (1) Origin (1) Orissa High Court (1) PBA (1) PD Act (1) PEC (1) PF (1) PHCs (1) PIB (1) PNDT Act (1) PTO (1) Panorama view (1) Parle Marie (1) Partnership (1) Paternity (1) Patta (1) Pending case (1) Pondicherry Code (1) Pondicherry Courts (1) Pondicherry Engineering College (1) Pondicherry University (1) Port (1) Possession (1) Post Office (1) Posters (1) Postmortem (1) Power (1) Prabha Sridevan (1) Preamble (1) Premarital sex (1) Press Trust of India (1) Prestige (1) Presumption of Death (1) Prisoners (1) Private (1) Private Defence (1) Prize Draw Contest (1) Profession (1) Profile (1) Promotion (1) Prosecution (1) Protest (1) Provident Fund (1) Public Prosecutor (1) Puducherry Code (1) Pulipaarvai (1) Quash (1) Quattrocchi (1) Quick Links (1) RCOP (1) RDBFI Act (1) RIM (1) RPF (1) Railway Budget (1) Railway Tribunal (1) Railways Act (1) Rajasthan High Court (1) Rajasuria (1) Rajeswari case (1) Rajya Sabha (1) Re-name (1) Recovery (1) Refund (1) Regional SC Bench (1) Registration (1) Regulations (1) Reinstatement (1) Relatives (1) Reliance (1) Religion (1) Religious Functions (1) Remanding (1) Removal (1) Rename (1) Repeal of Local Laws (1) Resident (1) Respondent (1) Retired Judges (1) Retired Staffs (1) Revaluation (1) Rexona Soap (1) Right to Information Act (1) Right to Sleep (1) Rin (1) Romania (1) Rural (1) SMS (1) SPP (1) Sachar Commission (1) Safai Karamchari Andolan case (1) Sanction (1) Saree (1) Satta Padhukappu (1) Scam (1) Secretary (1) Section 102 CPC (1) Section 125(3) (1) Section 66A (1) Sections 499 and 500 (1) Security (1) Senior Advocate (1) Septic Tank (1) Serials (1) Service matters (1) Settlement (1) Sewerage works (1) Shankaracharya case (1) Sheristadar (1) Ship (1) Shivaji Ganesan Statue (1) Sivaji Ganesan Statue (1) Sleeping (1) Soap (1) Son (1) Special Marriages Act (1) Sri Lanka (1) Sri Lanka Supreme Court (1) Sri Meenakshi Sundareswarar Temple (1) Suicide (1) Sukanya (1) Surgery (1) Syllabus (1) TNPSC (1) TV (1) Tamil Links (1) Telecom (1) Telegraph Act (1) Thanthai Periyar (1) Third Party (1) Thirukural (1) Thirunelveli (1) Ticket Bookings (1) Ticket less Journey (1) Tide (1) Time-barred matters (1) Title suit (1) Toronto (1) Trademarks (1) Traffic (1) Transfer Certificate (1) Transport Authority (1) Travels Agent (1) Trees (1) Tripurar (1) Turban law (1) USE Act (1) Ukraine (1) Unauthorised layouts (1) Unauthorised plots (1) Unconstitutional (1) Union Carbide Corporation (1) Union Minister (1) Universities (1) Unruly Advocates (1) Unwed mother (1) Uttarakhand (1) Uttaranchal (1) VAO (1) VRS (1) Vacuum Cleaner (1) Vakalat (1) Vaseline (1) Verbal (1) Video Poker (1) Video-conferencing (1) Vijayakant (1) Visa (1) Voters (1) Voting (1) Wakf (1) Watchman (1) Who's Who (1) Widow (1) Will (1) Word (1) Workmen Compensation Act (1) Wrong Provision (1) Yahoo (1) architects (1) azhagiri (1) british airways (1) churidar (1) deccan herald (1) delh (1) double taxation (1) e-Library (1) eBay (1) eCourt (1) ebc (1) farmers loan waiver (1) germany citizen (1) guideline value (1) guruvayur devaswom (1) hMatrimonial case (1) india (1) law and order (1) nawaz sharif (1) pakistan (1) pakistan supreme court (1) practical lawyer (1) pratiba (1) promise (1) rules (1) sand mining (1) southern districts (1) uk (1) warrants for cash scam (1) தி இந்து (1) தூக்கம் (1)