At the outset right below the headline, 'Privacy a Fundamental Right, rules SC' ... it says:
'A nine-judge Constitution bench unanimously overruled the TWO EARLIER JUDGEMENTS OF THE APEX COURT that right to privacy is not protected under the Constitution.'
The report also says: 'THE SUBSEQUENT VERDICTS (pronounced after the 1050 and 1960 verdicts) M P Sharma and Kharak Singh)HAVE LAID DOWN THE CORRECT POSITION OF THE LAW'.
(Kindly note the portions in all caps are not capitalised in the original. i have only used all caps for emphasis and your attention).
i was surprised to read that "subsequent verdicts pronounced after the 1950 and 1960 verdicts ... have laid down the correct position of the law".
If so, why was there a need to have set up yet another "nine-judge Constitution bench" just to unanimously overrule the two earlier judgements -- of 1950 and 1960 -- of the apex court?
How many verdicts were there of the apex court after the (1950 and 1960 verdicts)one that "have laid down the correct position of the law."
What was the need to waste money and time of the apex court?
AND P L E A S E tell us which submissions made by that "battery of senior lawyers" were for and how many were against. It would be useful for the public to know this.
Re: Am cofused by the reort of this verdict.
by V Nagarajan on Aug 24, 2017 05:11 PM
You are correct? Not just this. Everything about India and its ways of doing things confuse me.There are one million cases pending in each court but SC thinks triple talaq and privacy is important.What misplaced priorities?Each HC has 50% vacancies. Who & when are they going to fill it?How are they planning to stop train accidents?Sad.
Re: Re: Am cofused by the reort of this verdict.
by Vijay Sahani on Aug 24, 2017 10:34 PM
Triple Talaq affect at least 9 crore citizens and privacy affects 1.25 billion citizens of India and you say these are misplaced priorities?
At the outset right below the headline, 'Privacy a Fundamental Right, rules SC' ... it says:
'A nine-judge Constitution bench unanimously overruled the TWO EARLIER JUDGEMENTS OF THE APEX COURT that right to privacy is not protected under the Constitution.'
The report also says: 'THE SUBSEQUENT VERDICTS (pronounced after the 1050 and 1960 verdicts) M P Sharma and Kharak Singh)HAVE LAID DOWN THE CORRECT POSITION OF THE LAW'.
(Kindly note the portions in all caps are not capitalised in the original. i have only used all caps for emphasis and your attention).
i was surprised to read that "subsequent verdicts pronounced after the 1950 and 1960 verdicts ... have laid down the correct position of the law".
If so, why was there a need to have set up yet another "nine-judge Constitution bench" just to unanimously overrule the two earlier judgements -- of 1950 and 1960 -- of the apex court?
How many verdicts were there of the apex court after the (1950 and 1960 verdicts)one that "have laid down the correct position of the law."
What was the need to waste money and time of the apex court?
AND P L E A S E tell us which submissions made by that "battery of senior lawyers" were for and how many were against. It would be useful for the public to know this.
At the outset right below the headline, 'Privacy a Fundamental Right, rules SC' ... it says:
'A nine-judge Constitution bench unanimously overruled the TWO EARLIER JUDGEMENTS OF THE APEX COURT that right to privacy is not protected under the Constitution.'
The report also says: 'THE SUBSEQUENT VERDICTS (pronounced after the 1050 and 1960 verdicts) M P Sharma and Kharak Singh)HAVE LAID DOWN THE CORRECT POSITION OF THE LAW'.
(Kindly note the portions in all caps are not capitalised in the original. i have only used all caps for emphasis and your attention).
i was surprised to read that "subsequent verdicts pronounced after the 1950 and 1960 verdicts ... have laid down the correct position of the law".
If so, why was there a need to have set up yet another "nine-judge Constitution bench" just to unanimously overrule the two earlier judgements -- of 1950 and 1960 -- of the apex court?
How many verdicts were there of the apex court after the (1950 and 1960 verdicts)one that "have laid down the correct position of the law."
What was the need to waste money and time of the apex court?
AND P L E A S E tell us which submissions made by that "battery of senior lawyers" were for and how many were against. It would be useful for the public to know this.
At the outset right below the headline, 'Privacy a Fundamental Right, rules SC' ... it says:
'A nine-judge Constitution bench unanimously overruled the TWO EARLIER JUDGEMENTS OF THE APEX COURT that right to privacy is not protected under the Constitution.'
The report also says: 'THE SUBSEQUENT VERDICTS (pronounced after the 1050 and 1960 verdicts) M P Sharma and Kharak Singh)HAVE LAID DOWN THE CORRECT POSITION OF THE LAW'.
(Kindly note the portions in all caps are not capitalised in the original. i have only used all caps for emphasis and your attention).
i was surprised to read that "subsequent verdicts pronounced after the 1950 and 1960 verdicts ... have laid down the correct position of the law".
If so, why was there a need to have set up yet another "nine-judge Constitution bench" just to unanimously overrule the two earlier judgements -- of 1950 and 1960 -- of the apex court?
How many verdicts were there of the apex court after the (1950 and 1960 verdicts)one that "have laid down the correct position of the law."
What was the need to waste money and time of the apex court?
AND P L E A S E tell us which submissions made by that "battery of senior lawyers" were for and how many were against. It would be useful for the public to know this.
Why not Indian Government follow the ID used in USA. I personally feel, if you are honest you need not worry about anything.By scrapping Aadar there is every chance that the situation shall go back favouring Anti Social elements, those who can have many number if ID like one can have 5 PAN, 5 Family card etc.
Re: aadar
by LAKSHMINARAYANAN narayanan on Aug 24, 2017 06:15 PM
You have to make PAN fool proof that is enough. Make legislation to regulate the PAN issue. Then all problem will be solved. But the govt wants easy route. But this route affects fundamental rights. So Govt has to devise new method to curb misuse of PAN.
Re: Re: aadar
by LAKSHMINARAYANAN narayanan on Aug 24, 2017 06:17 PM
Just like demonitisation let them do for PAN. Abolish all PAN cards and issue fresh one, taking into account provision of misuse and penalty of Imprisonment upto 5 years for procuring multiple PAN.
LANDMARK JUDGEMENT BY TOPMOST COURT OF OUR COUNTRY.GOVERNMENT MUST UNDERSTAND THAT FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS ARE PROVIDED BY THE CONSTITUTION MUST BE HONORED AT ALL COST.
The Supreme Court Judgement is welcome but what about its implementation? Furthermore, Aadhar linking have removed many fake beneficiaries and illegal migrants who were milking the state exchequer. The Court should consider the merits of Aadhar before delivering any judgement on the issue.
Re: Right to Privacy
by logical indian on Aug 24, 2017 01:36 PM
SC has not striken down complete aadhaaar. All they said is privacy has to be respected so govt needs to rework on it and make sure privacy is maintained
Re: Re: Right to Privacy
by mvshetty shetty on Aug 24, 2017 02:30 PM
Why the so called liberals object when SC on earlier judgements said that privacy is not constitutional. They did not object when the congress brought rules which affected peoples fundemental rights?. Because at that it suited them. The BJP objected to Adhaar because it was brought to legitamise the muslim refugees. from nabouring country. Also duplication of PAN and ADHAAR.In PAN and Adhaar card Only name and place of your fathers birth place should be mentioned. All other details should be hidden except your photo. This will ensure privacy of indidual when he gives a copy of PAN card or Adhar as Proof of Identity.
Re: Another slapped by sc
by paul theo on Aug 24, 2017 01:25 PM
WELL DONE , THE BJP GOVT WANTS TO STRIP INDIANS OF ALL RIGHTS , THE CHAIWALA HAS IMPOSED AN UNDECLARED EMERGENCY , BY FOLLOWING THE DICTATS OF THE RSS
Re: Re: Another slapped by sc
by logical indian on Aug 24, 2017 01:27 PM
DO you know anything on emergency? Ask your party drug addict on the same..his grand mother was expert in declaring emergency -:)
Re: Re: Another slapped by sc
by Narender on Aug 24, 2017 02:12 PM
Absolutely correct, Chaiwala is a dictator and better people of inida understand is stunts and get rid of this dictator. Look at the way BJP have implemented half cooked GST in haste and caused chaos in the market. With prices of all goods coming under neccessities have risen post GST. Shame on the working style of Chaiwala
Re: Re: Re: Another slapped by sc
by logical indian on Aug 24, 2017 02:21 PM
In us also there is social security number but no one calls that dictatorship because it is implemented properly. As usual in all cases aadhaaar is also an example of wrong implementation that is all
Re: Re: Re: Another slapped by sc
by Sanat Samantray on Aug 24, 2017 02:29 PM
We will vote 100 times to this chai wala who works for the betterment for the country.. not those pseudo secularlrs, lefts and Congress.. the most corrupt party in the country... AADHAR card is required and Biometric Identification is required for successful implementation of social welfare... Mind you this judgement is only for privacy for fundamenta rights not against using Biometric data for government benefits and identification...
Re: Re: Re: Another slapped by sc
by suranjeet pati on Aug 24, 2017 02:55 PM
You people are telling chaiwala chaiwala why I dont know. So you all like the dynasty to stay in India forever. It was a superb step by govt to link aadhar with everything which will curb corruption and save our country billions of dollar.
Re: Another slapped by sc
by logical indian on Aug 24, 2017 01:26 PM
Aadhaar is not stopped by SC. IN cases where privacy is being invaded you cannt make aadhaar compulsory which means for subsidies, tax etc can still have aadhaar compulsory as that does not invade privacy as such..
Re: Re: Another slapped by sc
by logical indian on Aug 24, 2017 02:23 PM
He is a convert. For personal gains these converts can sell any country also. After Nepal quake they we to Nepal also not for helping but for conversion. These xtians are the most crooked of the people available in the country. Come to Kerala and you will instantly understand it
Re: Re: Re: Another slapped by sc
by suresh kumar on Aug 24, 2017 03:02 PM
come to Kerala to understand that this state stand first in literacy, healthcare, land reforms, social security index, tourism.. high female to male ratio.. Do you know the reason? No communal divisions.. all religions are equally forward in education..
Re: Re: Re: Re: Another slapped by sc
by logical indian on Aug 24, 2017 03:06 PM
I am from kerala and I come there every 3 months.I have a office in kochi too..I agree with your points but that does not kill my point in anyway..xtians are crooked and they even f00l people into doing things and this I have seen a lot in kerala only..
Re: Re: Re: Re: Another slapped by sc
by logical indian on Aug 24, 2017 03:09 PM
"equally forward in education" Now the question is that why does kannur burn? also why does pe-op-le from north kerala join ISIS and many T organization? Answer is actually either lack of money or lack of education..do not f00l me man I am a keralite myself...
Re: Re: Re: Re: Another slapped by sc
by logical indian on Aug 24, 2017 03:09 PM
"equally forward in education" Now the question is that why does kannur burn? also why does pe-op-le from north kerala join ISIS and many T organization? Answer is actually either lack of money or lack of education..do not f00l me man I am a keralite myself...
Re: Re: Re: Another slapped by sc
by kalyan krishnan V R on Aug 24, 2017 04:26 PM
for personal gains - absolutely. they forget their forefathers and hate Hindus and BJP.
Re: Re: Re: Another slapped by sc
by Dolly Bindra on Aug 24, 2017 07:37 PM
100% correct. I am an associate professor in a big city teaching in a cristean college. I had a difference with one other person and they utilised this opportunity to Offer me to convert Shamlessly
