color_logo_transparent.png

Welcome to INDJustice!

Bhim Singh vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir

Bhim Singh vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir

By Shiralee Kinariwala

Petitioner...................................................................... M.L.A. of Jammu and Kashmir

Respondent...................................................................state of Jammu and Kashmir

BACKGROUND OF THE CASE

Bhim Singh is an Indian politician, lawyer, activist and also a renowned author. He was a leader of Jammu and Kashmir national panther party.  He propounded the party in 1882, along with his spouse jay mala. He was a chairman of this party for 30 years. In 2002, the elections which were held at Jammu and Kashmir were won by his own panther’s party. He won all the seats at Udhampur district and formed the part of the coalition government. He was having good terms with many of the dictators. He has also held several designations in the Indian youth congress such as general secretary, vice president and also the president of Jammu and Kashmir state youth congress and was appointed by the Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. He was also an elected member of the Jammu and Kashmir legislative assembly. Though he was a Hindu by religion he has never favoured any kind of discrimination. He was secular for over 55 years by living in Jammu and Kashmir where there is a majority of Muslim.

FACTS OF THE CASE-

In this case petitioner was a M.L.A. Of Jammu and Kashmir. While he was going to attend the assembly session we was retained by some police officer and they did not allow him to go and he was going for a session at the session assembly which was met at 11th September, 1985. There was also a voting session at the assembly and he was not able to vote as he was not allowed to go. Mr. Bhim Singh was arrested and was not presented before the magistrate of four days and was kept in some hidden place. He was going to the assembly where his vote was very crucial but the person to whom he wanted to give the vote won but his right to vote was infringed. After when he was not satisfied with the judgement of the high court then he went to the Supreme Court by filing the writ petition under article 32 of the Indian constitution.

ISSUES OF THE CASE-

1.     Whether monetary compensation was a suitable remedy or not?

2.     Whether detention of the M.L.A. Bhim Singh was valid or not?

JUDGEMENT OF THE CASE

In this case the petitioner was detained unlawfully when he was going to attend the assembly session at the parliament. And he was also deprived of article 21 of the Indian constitution and also many other fundamental rights were also deprived. As we have part iii of the Indian constitution which gives many rights to the citizens and also there is also a personal liberty to each and every individual to go wherever they want to go no one can restraint unlawfully. The count awarded him 50,000/- compensation to the Bhim Singh whose fundamental rights were infringed by the state.

UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION VS. UNION OF INDIA

UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION VS. UNION OF INDIA

Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom v. Albania)

Corfu Channel Case (United Kingdom v. Albania)