📚 LAW STUDENTS © 📚

🔰 Indian Young Lawyers Association v. State of Kerala (Sabarimala, 2018) 🔰 Citation: (2019) 11 SCC 1 https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📒 Brief Facts Women aged 10–50 were banned from entering Sabarimala temple. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📒 Issues Whether ban violates Articles 14 (Equality), 15 (Non-discrimination), 25 (Freedom of Religion). https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📒 Judgment Supreme Court held: ⚖️ Ban violates constitutional morality and equality. ⚖️ Freedom of religion cannot override fundamental rights. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📒 Significance Landmark for gender equality over religious practice.

🔰 Right to Education Cases – Unni Krishnan v. State of Andhra Pradesh (1993) 🔰 Citation: (1993) 1 SCC 645 https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📔 Brief Facts Petition challenged unaided private schools charging high fees, limiting access to poor children. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📔 Issues Does Right to Education form part of Article 21 (Right to Life)? https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📔 Judgment Supreme Court held: ⚖️ Free and compulsory education is a fundamental right under Article 21. ⚖️ Private schools may exist but must be regulated for equity and access. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📔 Significance Foundation for Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009.

🔰 Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Corporation (1985) 🔰 Citation: 1985 SCC (3) 545 https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📓 Brief Facts Pavement dwellers in Mumbai faced eviction without rehabilitation. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📓 Issues Whether eviction violates Right to Life (Article 21) and livelihood rights. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📓 Judgment Supreme Court held: ⚖️ Right to livelihood is integral to Article 21. ⚖️ Eviction without due notice and rehabilitation is unconstitutional. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📓 Significance Recognized economic rights as part of fundamental rights. Paved way for urban housing and slum rehabilitation policies.

🔰 Bandhua Mukti Morcha v. Union of India (1984) 🔰 Citation: AIR 1984 SC 802 https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📰 Brief Facts Petition filed for rescued bonded laborers exploited in factories and mines. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📰 Issues Whether bonded labor violates Articles 21, 23 (prohibition of forced labor). https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📰 Judgment Supreme Court held: ⚖️ Bonded labor is illegal and unconstitutional. ⚖️ Courts can intervene to rescue, rehabilitate and compensate victims. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📰 Significance Landmark for labor rights and human dignity. Expanded PIL scope to protect marginalized workers.

🔰 People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India (2003) 🔰 Citation: (2003) 4 SCC 399 https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 🗞 Brief Facts Petitioner challenged custodial deaths and illegal detention of prisoners. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 🗞 Issues Whether right to life (Article 21) includes protection against custodial violence. Scope of judicial intervention in human rights violations. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 🗞 Judgment Supreme Court held: ⚖️ Citizens have right to protection from arbitrary detention and custodial death. ⚖️ Directed strict enforcement of police accountability. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 🗞 Significance Landmark for human rights and custodial justice. Strengthened PIL as a tool to protect vulnerable populations.

🔰 Subhash Kumar v. State of Bihar (1991) 🔰 Citation: AIR 1991 SC 420 https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📌 Brief Facts Groundwater was contaminated with toxic chemicals, affecting residents. Petition filed to protect citizens’ health and environment. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📌 Issues Whether Right to Life (Article 21) includes the right to pollution-free water and air. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📌 Judgment Supreme Court held: ⚖️ Right to life includes the right to wholesome environment, clean water and air. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📌 Significance Expanded Article 21 to include environmental rights. Reinforced government responsibility to protect public health.

🔰 M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (1987) – Ganga Pollution Case 🔰 https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📍 Brief Facts Several tanneries discharged untreated effluents into river Ganga, polluting water and harming public health. Petition filed under Public Interest Litigation (PIL). https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📍 Issues Whether citizens’ right to clean environment is protected under Article 21. Whether industries can be held liable for environmental harm. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📍 Judgment Supreme Court held: ⚖️ Right to a clean and healthy environment is part of Article 21 (Right to Life). ⚖️ Introduced Polluter Pays Principle and absolute liability for hazardous industries. https://youtube.com/c/LAWEXPLORER 📍 Significance Landmark in environmental jurisprudence in India. Established PIL as a tool for environmental protection.