CONSTITUTION

Here’s a comprehensive table of important principles/theories of constitutional law, formatted as requested:

Theory/Principle Crisp Explanation Propounder/Supporters Criticism Relevant Cases Incorporated in

Section/Act (if any)
Doctrine of Basic Certain fundamental Keshavananda Bharati Critics argue it Keshavananda Bharati Implied in Article 368
Structure features of the (1973) curtails v. State of Kerala (Amendment
Constitution cannot be parliamentary (1973): Defined basic procedure).
amended by Parliament. sovereignty. structure.
Doctrine of Powers are divided among Montesquieu Critics argue it is Indira Gandhi v. Raj Reflected in Articles
Separation of the Legislature, Executive, impractical in a Narain (1975): Upheld 50, 121, 122, 212, 361.
Powers and Judiciary to prevent parliamentary separation principles.
concentration of power. system.
Doctrine of Rule of The law is supreme, and A.V. Dicey Critics argue it lacks ADM Jabalpur v. Implied in Preamble,
Law all are equal before it. enforceability in Shivkant Shukla (1976): Article 14 (Equality
practice. Tested rule of law during before law).
Emergency.
Doctrine of Pith Examines the true nature Rooted in Canadian Critics argue it blurs State of Bombay v. F.N. Incorporated in Article
and Substance of legislation to determine jurisprudence clear jurisdictional Balsara (1951): Applied 246, Seventh Schedule.
legislative competence. boundaries. in determining legislative
power.
Doctrine of When legislation appears Rooted in Indian case law Critics argue it limits K.C. Gajapati Narayan Implied in Article 246,
Colourable to be within jurisdiction legislative Deo v. State of Orissa Seventh Schedule.
Legislation but indirectly exceeds it, it flexibility. (1954): Defined doctrine.
is invalid.
Doctrine of Eclipse Pre-constitutional laws Rooted in Indian Critics argue it Bhikaji Narain Dhakras Incorporated in Article
inconsistent with jurisprudence creates ambiguity in v. State of MP (1955): 13(1) (Laws
fundamental rights are not the status of laws. Explained doctrine. inconsistent with
void but dormant. Fundamental Rights).
Doctrine of Waiver Individuals cannot waive Rooted in Indian case law Critics argue it Basheshar Nath v. CIT Reflected in Articles
their fundamental rights. restricts individual (1959): Held fundamental 13, 32, 226.
autonomy. rights cannot be waived.
Doctrine of A state can legislate Rooted in English law Critics argue it can State of Bombay v. Reflected in Article
Territorial Nexus extraterritorially if there is lead to legislative R.M.D. 245.
sufficient connection with overreach. Chamarbaugwala
the territory. (1957): Applied doctrine.
 Principle of Judiciary has the power to Rooted in Marbury v. Critics argue it L. Chandra Kumar v. Reflected in Articles
Judicial Review review laws and executive Madison allows judicial Union of India (1997): 13, 32, 226, 136.
actions for overreach into Upheld judicial review.
constitutionality. legislative and
executive domains.
Doctrine of Matters not enumerated in Canadian Constitution Critics argue it Union of India v. H.S. Incorporated in Article
Residuary Powers the State or Concurrent centralizes power, Dhillon (1972): 248, Entry 97 of Union
List fall under the Union undermining Discussed residuary List.
List. federalism. powers.
Principle of Ensures fairness in Rooted in common law Critics argue it can Maneka Gandhi v. Implied in Article 21
Natural Justice administrative and judicial delay proceedings Union of India (1978): (Right to life and
proceedings, including due to procedural Emphasized fairness. liberty).
rules against bias and right complexities.
to be heard.
Doctrine of Conflicting laws or Rooted in Indian Critics argue it may CIT v. Hindustan Bulk Reflected in Article
Harmonious constitutional provisions jurisprudence compromise clear Carriers (2003): Applied 246, Schedules.
Construction should be interpreted to legal mandates. doctrine.
harmonize with each
other.
Doctrine of Decisions may operate Justice Subba Rao Critics argue it Golak Nath v. State of Applied in judicial
Prospective prospectively to avoid (Indian context) creates inconsistency Punjab (1967): pronouncements, not
Overruling injustice or administrative in the application of Introduced in India. explicitly codified.
chaos. precedents.
Principle of In case of conflict between Rooted in Indian Critics argue it State of Karnataka v. Incorporated in Articles
Federal Union and State laws, federalism weakens state Union of India (1977): 246, 254.
Supremacy Union laws prevail. autonomy. Discussed federal
supremacy.
Principle of Ensures equality before Rooted in A.V. Dicey Critics argue it Indra Sawhney v. Union Reflected in Articles
Equality the law and prohibits overlooks of India (1992): 14-18.
discrimination. substantive Addressed equality in
inequality in society. reservations.

CASES

Case Name (Year) Article(s) Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern

Involved
 Keshavananda Bharati v. State of Article 368 Established the Basic Structure Doctrine. Limits on constitutional
Kerala (1973) amendment.
Minerva Mills v. Union of India (1980) Articles 31C, Reaffirmed Basic Structure Doctrine and struck down parts of Balance between DPSPs and
368 the 42nd Amendment. FRs.
Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India Article 21 Expanded the scope of Article 21 to include the right to live Personal liberty and due
(1978) with dignity. process.
A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras Article 21 Narrow interpretation of personal liberty under Article 21. Procedure established by law.
(1950)
Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain Article 329(b) Struck down clause preventing judicial review of election Judicial review of elections.
(1975) disputes.
I.C. Golaknath v. State of Punjab Article 13, 368 Held that Parliament cannot amend Fundamental Rights. Amendment power vs. FRs.
(1967)
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) Article 14, 21 Laid down guidelines for prevention of sexual harassment at Gender justice and workplace
the workplace. rights.
SR Bommai v. Union of India (1994) Article 356 Judicial review of President's Rule under Article 356 Federalism and misuse of
established. Article 356.
State of Madras v. Champakam Article 15(4), Led to the First Amendment allowing special provisions for Reservation and equality.
Dorairajan (1951) 29(2) backward classes.
Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Article 14, 21 Upheld maintenance rights of Muslim women under Section Uniform Civil Code debate.
Begum (1985) 125 CrPC.
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India Article 14, 15, Decriminalized consensual homosexual acts under Section LGBTQ+ rights and equality.
(2018) 21 377 IPC.
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Article 368 Introduced the "basic structure" doctrine limiting Parliament's Scope of constitutional
Kerala (1973) power. amendments.
L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of India Article 323A, Upheld the primacy of judicial review by the High Courts and Independence of judiciary.
(1997) 323B Supreme Court.
Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) Article 21 Declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right under Privacy as a Fundamental
Article 21. Right.

Fundamental Rights first and build from there.

1. Landmark Cases on Fundamental Rights

Case Name (Year) Article(s) Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern
Involved
A.K. Gopalan v. State of Madras Article 21 Narrow interpretation of personal liberty under Article 21. Procedure established by
(1950) law.
 Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India Article 21 Expanded Article 21 to include substantive due process and the Personal liberty and due
(1978) right to live with dignity. process.
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Article 368, 13 Introduced the "basic structure" doctrine limiting Parliament's Scope of constitutional
Kerala (1973) power to amend the Constitution. amendments.
Minerva Mills v. Union of India Articles 31C, Reaffirmed Basic Structure Doctrine; struck down parts of the Balance between DPSPs
(1980) 368 42nd Amendment. and FRs.
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) Articles 14, 21 Introduced workplace guidelines to prevent sexual harassment. Gender justice and
workplace rights.
Puttaswamy v. Union of India (2017) Article 21 Declared the right to privacy as a fundamental right. Privacy as a Fundamental
Right.
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India Articles 14, 15, Decriminalized consensual homosexual acts under Section 377 LGBTQ+ rights and
(2018) 21 IPC. equality.
Shayara Bano v. Union of India Articles 14, 21 Declared instant triple talaq (talaq-e-biddat) unconstitutional. Gender equality in
(2017) marriage.
Mohd. Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Article 14, 21 Upheld maintenance rights of Muslim women under Section 125 Gender justice in personal
Begum (1985) CrPC. law.
Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain Articles 329(b) Struck down laws protecting PM elections from judicial scrutiny. Judicial review in elections.
(1975)
Olga Tellis v. Bombay Municipal Article 21 Recognized the right to livelihood under Article 21. Livelihood rights.
Corporation (1985)

2. Landmark Cases on Federalism

Case Name (Year) Article(s) Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern
Involved
SR Bommai v. Union of India (1994) Articles 356, 14 Restricted misuse of President's Rule and emphasized Federalism and emergency
judicial review. powers.
State of West Bengal v. Union of India Articles 245, 246 Upheld Parliament's power to acquire property under Union Federalism and legislative
(1963) List. power.
Bharat Hydro Power v. State of Assam Articles 246, 14 Clarified state vs. central powers regarding electricity Federalism and concurrent list.
(2004) generation.

1. Landmark Cases on Fundamental Rights (Extended)

Case Name (Year) Article(s) Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern Judge(s) (Dissent Highlighted)
Involved
A.K. Gopalan v. State of Article 21 Narrow interpretation of personal liberty Procedure established Kania CJ, Fazl Ali (dissent),
Madras (1950) under Article 21. by law. Mukherjea, Das, and others.
 Maneka Gandhi v. Union of Article 21 Expanded Article 21 to include substantive Personal liberty and Bhagwati, Chandrachud,
India (1978) due process. due process. Krishna Iyer, and others.
Kesavananda Bharati v. State Article 368, Established the Basic Structure Doctrine Scope of constitutional Sikri CJ, Chandrachud, Khanna
of Kerala (1973) 13 limiting Parliament's amending power. amendments. (pivotal), Ray (dissent).
Minerva Mills v. Union of Articles 31C, Reaffirmed Basic Structure Doctrine and Balance between Chandrachud CJ, Bhagwati, and
India (1980) 368 invalidated parts of the 42nd Amendment. DPSPs and FRs. others.
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan Articles 14, Issued workplace guidelines for sexual Gender justice and Verma CJ, Sujata Manohar, and
(1997) 21 harassment prevention. workplace rights. others.
Puttaswamy v. Union of India Article 21 Declared the right to privacy as a fundamental Privacy as a Chandrachud, Nariman,
(2017) right. Fundamental Right. Chelameswar, Bobde, and
others.
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union Articles 14, Decriminalized consensual homosexual acts LGBTQ+ rights and Chandrachud, Indu Malhotra,
of India (2018) 15, 21 under Section 377 IPC. equality. Nariman, and others.
Shayara Bano v. Union of Articles 14, Declared instant triple talaq unconstitutional. Gender equality in Nariman, Joseph, and others;
India (2017) 21 personal law. Abdul Nazeer (dissent).
Olga Tellis v. Bombay Article 21 Recognized the right to livelihood as part of Livelihood rights. Chandrachud CJ and others.
Municipal Corporation Article 21.
(1985)
Bijoe Emmanuel v. State of Article Held that not singing the national anthem is Freedom of expression Chinappa Reddy, Oza, and
Kerala (1986) 19(1)(a), 25 not disrespect if done on religious grounds. and religion. others.

2. Landmark Cases on Federalism

Case Name (Year) Article(s) Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern Judge(s) (Dissent
Involved Highlighted)
SR Bommai v. Union of India Articles 356, Restricted misuse of President's Rule and Federalism and Ahmadi CJ, Jeevan Reddy,
(1994) 14 emphasized judicial review. emergency powers. Sawant, and others.
State of West Bengal v. Union Articles 245, Upheld Parliament's power to acquire property Federalism and B.P. Sinha CJ and others.
of India (1963) 246 under the Union List. legislative power.
Bharat Hydro Power v. State Articles 246, Clarified state vs. central powers regarding Federalism and Y.K. Sabharwal and others.
of Assam (2004) 14 electricity generation. concurrent list.
Union of India v. Harbhajan Articles 246, Upheld Parliament's legislative competence to Legislative competence Ray, Hegde (dissent), and
Singh Dhillon (1972) 14 tax under Entry 97 of the Union List. of Parliament. others.

3. Landmark Cases on Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSPs)

Case Name (Year) Article(s) Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern Judge(s) (Dissent Highlighted)
Involved
 Champakam Dorairajan v. Articles 15(4), Held that DPSPs cannot override Reservation and Patanjali Sastri CJ and others.
State of Madras (1951) 29(2) Fundamental Rights; led to the 1st equality.
Amendment.
State of Kerala v. N.M. Articles 14, Upheld special measures for backward Equality vs. Ray CJ, Krishna Iyer, and others;
Thomas (1976) 16, 39 classes under Article 16(4). affirmative action. Khanna (dissent).
Ashoka Kumar Thakur v. Articles 15, 16 Upheld 27% reservation for OBCs in higher Reservation policy. Balakrishnan CJ, Pasayat, and
Union of India (2008) educational institutions. others; Bhandari (dissent).

Judiciary, Miscellaneous cases, and recent important cases, while maintaining the structure for easier reference.

4. Landmark Cases on Judiciary

Case Name (Year) Article(s) Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern Judge(s) (Dissent
Involved Highlighted)
S.P. Gupta v. Union of India (1981) Article 124 Advocated for transparency in judicial Judicial Bhagwati, Pathak, and
appointments, beginning the Judges' Case independence. others; Gupta (dissent).
trilogy.
Supreme Court Advocates-on- Article 124 Established the Collegium system for judicial Judicial Verma, Pandian, and others.
Record Assn. v. Union of India appointments. independence.
(1993)
In re Presidential Reference (1998) Article 143 Clarified the functioning of the Collegium Judicial Anand CJ, Verma, and
system and roles of CJI and executive. appointments. others.
K. Veeraswami v. Union of India Article 124 Allowed prosecution of judges for corruption Accountability of Venkatachaliah, Sawant, and
(1991) with prior consent of the CJI. judiciary. others.
L. Chandra Kumar v. Union of Articles Reaffirmed High Court and Supreme Court Judicial review and Ahmadi CJ, Jeevan Reddy,
India (1997) 323A, 323B primacy in judicial review. tribunals. and others.
Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain Article 329(b) Struck down immunity for electoral disputes Judicial review in Ray CJ, Khanna (dissent),
(1975) under constitutional amendments. elections. and others.

5. Miscellaneous Landmark Cases

Case Name (Year) Article(s) Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern Judge(s) (Dissent Highlighted)
Involved
Golaknath v. State of Articles 13, Held that Parliament cannot amend Amendment power vs. Subba Rao CJ, Hidayatullah, and
Punjab (1967) 368 Fundamental Rights. FRs. others.
Indra Sawhney v. Union of Articles 15(4), Upheld 27% reservation for OBCs but Reservation policy. Jeevan Reddy, Pandian, and others;
India (1992) 16(4) excluded the "creamy layer." Sawant (partial dissent).
 Naz Foundation v. Govt. of Article 21 Read down Section 377 IPC to exclude LGBTQ+ rights. A.P. Shah CJ and S. Muralidhar.
NCT of Delhi (2009) consensual adult homosexual acts.
A.R. Antulay v. R.S. Nayak Article 21, 14 Held that a fair trial is a fundamental right Right to fair trial. Oza, Shetty, and others.
(1988) under Article 21.
McDowell & Co. Ltd. v. Article 265, 14 Asserted the principle of tax avoidance as Tax evasion and Ramaswamy, and others.
CTO (1996) being against public interest. economic justice.
Union Carbide v. Union of Article 226 Ensured compensation for victims of the Environmental justice. Pathak, Ranganath Misra, and
India (1989) Bhopal gas tragedy. others.

6. Recent Important Cases

Case Name (Year) Article(s) Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern Judge(s) (Dissent Highlighted)
Involved
Shreya Singhal v. Union of India Articles Struck down Section 66A of the IT Act as Freedom of speech Nariman, Chelameswar.
(2015) 19(1)(a), 21 unconstitutional. online.
Indian Young Lawyers Articles 14, Opened Sabarimala Temple to women of Religious freedom vs. Chandrachud, Nariman, and
Association v. State of Kerala 25 all ages. equality. others; Malhotra (dissent).
(2018)
Rajasthan Electricity Board v. Article 12 Expanded "State" definition under Article State actions and Chandrachud, Bhatt, and others.
Mohan Lal (2021) 12 to include statutory bodies. liability.
Aditya Dubey v. Union of India Article 21 Ordered steps to combat stubble burning to Environmental N.V. Ramana, Chandrachud,
(2021) reduce pollution in Delhi NCR. protection. and others.

principles of administrative law:

No. Name Propounder Brief Explanation Criticized by Relevant Case Laws
Scholar/Judge
1 Rule of Law A.V. Dicey The concept that all individuals and Criticized by legal scholars Kesavananda Bharati v. State of
authorities are subject to and accountable who suggest that Kerala (1973), State of Uttar
under the law. Ensures no one is above the administrative discretion Pradesh v. Raj Narain (1975).
law, including government actions. sometimes prevails.
2 Doctrine of Ultra Early Government action or legislation is invalid if Criticized for being rigid Bihar Eastern Gangetic
Vires English it exceeds the powers conferred upon it by the and hindering administrative Fishermen Cooperative Society
Courts law or the constitution. discretion. v. Bihar State (1986), State of
West Bengal v. Union of India
(1964).
3 Principle of Derived from The requirement for a fair and just procedure Some argue it is often Maneka Gandhi v. Union of
Natural Justice Common before any public authority can make interpreted too broadly and India (1978), S.L. Kapoor v.
Law decisions that affect an individual's rights. undermines efficiency. Jagmohan (1980).
Includes the right to be heard.
4 Doctrine of Public Common Public authorities must be answerable to the Critics argue that this Common Cause v. Union of India
Accountability Law people, and their actions are subject to accountability may lead to (1996), Union of India v. C.G.
scrutiny by the courts or the legislature. delays in governance and Gupta (1978).
policy making.
5 Principle of European Administrative actions should be Some claim that this Indian Express Newspapers v.
Proportionality Law proportionate to the issue at hand, and no principle is subjective and Union of India (1985), R.D.
more restrictive than necessary to achieve the lacks clarity. Shetty v. International Airport
desired outcome. Authority (1979).
6 Principle of Common Public decision-making should be done Critics argue that fairness M.C. Mehta v. Union of India
Fairness Law transparently, impartially, and with fairness, might conflict with the (1987), R. v. Home Secretary, ex
without any bias, favoritism, or arbitrariness. efficiency of public parte Hosenball (1977).
administration.
7 Doctrine of Attorney An individual may expect a certain outcome Some argue that it expands Central Inland Water Transport
Legitimate General v. based on the conduct of public authorities, judicial intervention into Corporation v. Brojo Nath
Expectation Exeter City such as following a consistent practice or administrative matters. Ganguly (1986), R. v. Secretary
Council policy. of State for the Home
(UK) Department (1985).
8 Separation of Montesquieu The executive, legislature, and judiciary Some argue it is impractical Union of India v. R.G. Anand
Powers should be distinct and independent, preventing in modern governance due (2006), L. Chandra Kumar v.
any single entity from having too much to the interdependence of Union of India (1997).
power. functions.
9 Delegated Statutory Authorities may make laws within the limits Critics argue this can lead to A.K. Roy v. Union of India
Legislation Interpretation set by the legislature. While delegating bypassing legislative intent (1982), Jaya Gokul v. State of
powers, the delegation should not violate the and democratic principles. Tamil Nadu (1995).
Constitution.
10 Doctrine of Indian Every person is equal before the law and is Critics argue that equality is E.P. Royappa v. State of Tamil
Equality Constitution entitled to equal protection under the law. often interpreted selectively. Nadu (1974), State of Punjab v.
Discriminatory treatment by administrative Jaggu Ram (2006).
authorities is not allowed.

HUMAN RIGHTS
 Treaty/Convention Focus Year Important Clauses Reference to Indian Law/Case
Universal Declaration of Human Rights Fundamental human 1948 Articles 1-30; Right to life, liberty, Article 21 of the Indian Constitution
(UDHR) rights security, education, and free speech. (Right to Life) and various judgments
like Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India
(1978).
International Covenant on Civil and Civil and political 1966 Articles 6-27; Protection of rights to Article 19 (Freedom of speech),
Political Rights (ICCPR) rights life, liberty, fair trial, freedom of Article 21 (Right to Life), Kharak
speech, assembly, etc. Singh v. State of U.P. (1963).
International Covenant on Economic, Economic, social, and 1966 Articles 6-15; Rights to work, Right to education under Article 21A
Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) cultural rights education, social security, an adequate of the Indian Constitution,
standard of living. Unnikrishnan v. State of A.P. (1993).
Convention on the Elimination of All Racial discrimination 1965 Article 2-7; Prohibits discrimination on Article 15 (Equality before law), State
Forms of Racial Discrimination the grounds of race, color, descent, or of West Bengal v. Anwar Ali (1952).
(CERD) national or ethnic origin.
Convention on the Elimination of All Gender equality 1979 Articles 1-16; Rights to non- Article 14 (Right to equality for
Forms of Discrimination Against discrimination, equal participation in women), Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan
Women (CEDAW) political and public life, marriage, and (1997).
family.
Convention Against Torture and Other Prohibition of torture 1984 Articles 1-16; States must prevent and Article 21 (Right to life), D.K. Basu v.
Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading prohibit torture and ensure the rights of State of West Bengal (1997).
Treatment or Punishment (CAT) victims of torture.
Convention on the Rights of the Child Children's rights 1989 Articles 1-54; Protection of children Article 21A (Right to education),
(CRC) from abuse, neglect, education, health, Sheela Barse v. Union of India (1986).
and social integration.
International Convention on the Rights of migrant 1990 Articles 1-93; Protection of migrant Relevant under Article 23 (Prohibition
Protection of the Rights of All Migrant workers and families workers' rights, including conditions of of Forced Labour), State of U.P. v.
Workers and Members of Their employment, social rights, and Raj Narain (1972).
Families repatriation.
Convention on the Rights of Persons Rights of persons 2006 Articles 1-50; Protection of the rights Article 15 (Right to equality), Rajeev
with Disabilities (CRPD) with disabilities of persons with disabilities, including Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh
education, employment, and access to (2016).
services.
European Convention on Human Civil and political 1950 Articles 1-59; Right to life, fair trial, Not directly referenced in Indian law
Rights (ECHR) rights, judicial privacy, free expression, freedom of but influential in shaping Article 21
remedies and fundamental rights jurisprudence.
 religion, and prohibition of
discrimination.
International Convention on the Prohibition of 1973 Articles 1-8; Prevents apartheid and Relevant in contexts of discrimination,
Suppression and Punishment of the apartheid and racial similar forms of racial discrimination. such as in State of Maharashtra v.
Crime of Apartheid discrimination Madhukar Narayan Mardikar (1991).

LAW OF TORTS

important principles of tort law,

Principle Crisp Explanation Propounder/Supporters Criticism Relevant Cases Incorporated in

Section/Act (if any)
Principle of A person is liable for Rylands v. Fletcher Critics argue it is unfair M.C. Mehta v. Union Found in
Strict Liability damages caused by (1868) to hold someone liable of India (1987): environmental laws
dangerous activities even for harm caused by Applied in industrial and judicial decisions
without negligence or unforeseen disasters. in India.
intent. circumstances.
Principle of No exceptions apply; Indian jurisprudence (M.C. Criticized for being M.C. Mehta v. Union Applied in Article 21
Absolute liability is absolute for Mehta) excessively strict, of India (1987) (Oleum interpretations and
Liability harm from hazardous possibly deterring Gas Leak Case) environmental cases.
activities. economic growth.
Principle of One person is liable for Rooted in English law Criticized for imposing State Bank of India v. Incorporated in Indian
Vicarious the torts committed by liability on those not Shyama Devi (1978): jurisprudence, not
Liability another (e.g., employer directly involved in the Employer's liability. explicitly codified.
for employee). wrongful act.
Principle of A person is liable for Lord Atkin (Donoghue v. Critics argue it is Grant v. Australian Reflected in Motor
Negligence harm caused by failure to Stevenson, 1932) subjective and varies Knitting Mills (1936): Vehicles Act, 1988
exercise reasonable care. with circumstances. Product liability. (Section 166).
Principle of Liability arises from an Rooted in English common Critics argue it can be Ratlam Municipality Incorporated in
Nuisance unlawful interference with law overused for minor v. Vardhichand Section 268 of IPC
another's enjoyment of inconveniences. (1980): Public nuisance. and various
property or public spaces. environmental laws.
Principle of No liability arises when Rooted in Roman law Critics argue it is difficult Padmavati v. Reflected in judicial
Volenti Non Fit the injured person to determine genuine Dugganaika (1975): interpretations and
Injuria voluntarily consented to consent in complex Applied in voluntary not explicitly codified.
the risk of harm. scenarios. risk-taking.
Principle of Res The occurrence of the Rooted in English law Critics argue it may Shyam Sundar v. Incorporated in Indian
Ipsa Loquitur harm itself implies unfairly shift the burden State of Rajasthan evidence law through
negligence in certain of proof to the defendant. (1974): Doctrine judicial precedents.
situations. application in accidents.
Principle of Ubi Where there is a right, Rooted in Roman law Critics argue it cannot Ashby v. White Reflected in Articles
Jus Ibi there is a remedy for its address rights without (1703): Right to vote 32 and 226 of the
Remedium breach. corresponding legal without interference. Constitution.
remedies.
Principle of If the plaintiff contributes Rooted in English law Critics argue it is difficult Sayed Akbar v. State Implied in Motor
Contributory to their own harm, to apportion fault in of Karnataka (1980): Vehicles Act, 1988
Negligence damages may be reduced many cases. Applied in accidents. (Sections 163A, 166).
proportionately.
Doctrine of A defendant is only liable Wagon Mound Case Critics argue it limits the Overseas Tankship Reflected in Indian
Remoteness of for consequences that are (1961) scope of liability for (UK) Ltd v. Morts case law, not codified
Damage a proximate and serious but unforeseen Dock (1961): Wagon explicitly.
foreseeable result of their harms. Mound Principle.
act.
Principle of Focuses on harm caused Rooted in English common Critics argue it may lead Ratlam Municipality Incorporated in
Public Nuisance to public health, safety, or law to excessive restrictions v. Vardhichand Section 268 of IPC
convenience. on private activities. (1980): Applied for and public nuisance
public health. laws.
Doctrine of An employer is liable for Rooted in English law Criticized for being Sitaram Motilal Kalal Reflected in Indian
Respondeat the torts of employees inequitable in cases v. Santanuprasad common law
Superior committed in the course where employers lack (1966): Employer interpretations.
of employment. control over employees' liability upheld.
actions.
Principle of No- Liability arises regardless Rooted in industrial and Critics argue it may Charan Lal Sahu v. Incorporated in Motor
Fault Liability of negligence or intent, accident laws overburden industries and Union of India (1990): Vehicles Act, 1988
particularly in statutory insurance systems. Bhopal Gas Tragedy (Section 140).
contexts. case.
Doctrine of Liability ceases if an Rooted in English law Critics argue it is State of Haryana v. Reflected in Indian
Novus Actus independent and subjective and complex Santra (2000): Applied case law, not codified
Interveniens unforeseeable act breaks in application. in medical negligence explicitly.
the chain of causation. cases.
Doctrine of Actions taken to prevent a Rooted in Roman law Critics argue it creates Dudley and Stephens Reflected in judicial
Necessity greater harm may excuse loopholes for justifying (1884): Applied interpretations, not
liability. harmful actions. explicitly codified.
 necessity defense in
tortious cases.
Principle of Focuses on compensating Rooted in equity principles Critics argue it may not K. Nagireddi v. Govt. Incorporated in
Compensation victims for losses suffered fully address non- of Andhra Pradesh Sections 357, 357A of
due to wrongful acts. economic harms. (1999): Applied in state CrPC for victim
liability. compensation.

1. General Principles of Tort Law

Case Name (Year) Principle Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern Judge(s) (Dissent
Involved Highlighted)
Donoghue v. Stevenson Negligence Established the "neighbor principle," Duty of care and Lord Atkin (pivotal), Lord
(1932) foundational for modern negligence law. negligence. Macmillan.
Rylands v. Fletcher (1868) Strict Liability Introduced the rule of strict liability for non- Escape of hazardous Lord Cairns, Blackburn J.
natural use of land. substances.
Ashby v. White (1703) Right to Vote Recognized damages for interference with the Civil rights and Holt CJ (dissent by
right to vote. actionable wrongs. majority).
Blyth v. Birmingham Negligence Defined negligence as omission to do what a Standard of care. Alderson B, Bramwell B.
Waterworks (1856) reasonable man would do.
M.C. Mehta v. Union of Absolute Introduced absolute liability for hazardous Environmental Bhagwati CJ, Ranganath
India (1987) Liability industries in India. protection. Misra.
Gloucester Grammar Damnum sine Ruled that mere financial loss without legal Economic loss and legal Unreported medieval
School Case (1410) Injuria injury is not actionable. injury. bench.

2. Trespass, Nuisance, and Occupiers’ Liability

Case Name (Year) Principle Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern Judge(s) (Dissent
Involved Highlighted)
Bird v. Holbrook (1825) Trespass Landowners are liable for harm caused by Duty to trespassers. Tindal CJ.
hidden traps set for trespassers.
Sedleigh-Denfield v. Nuisance Recognized liability for nuisance caused by Nuisance and occupier's Viscount Maugham, Lords
O’Callaghan (1940) third parties if adopted by occupier. liability. Wright and Porter.
Packer v. Postmaster Public Public nuisance is actionable only if there is Distinction between Simon Brown LJ.
General (1984) Nuisance special damage to the claimant. public/private.
Goldman v. Hargrave Occupier's Established liability for natural nuisances where Natural nuisance. Lords Reid, Wilberforce.
(1967) Duty occupiers fail to act.

3. Vicarious Liability
 Case Name (Year) Principle Involved Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern Judge(s) (Dissent
Highlighted)
Limpus v. London General Omnibus Employer’s Liability Employers liable for wrongful acts done by Scope of Erle CJ.
Co. (1862) employees in the course of employment. employment.
Century Insurance v. Northern Vicarious Liability Employers held liable for an employee's Employer Lords Wright and
Ireland Road Transport Board for Negligence negligent act while on duty. liability. Porter.
(1942)
State Bank of India v. Shyama Devi Vicarious Liability in Banks are vicariously liable for employees' Liability of Krishna Iyer, Desai,
(1978) Banks wrongful acts. institutions. and others.

4. Defamation
Case Name (Year) Principle Involved Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern Judge(s) (Dissent
Highlighted)
R. v. Zenger (1735) Freedom of Speech Established truth as a defense against libel. Press freedom and Andrew Hamilton.
libel.
New York Times v. Sullivan Public Figures & Introduced “actual malice” standard for Free speech vs. Brennan J, Goldberg J.
(1964) Defamation defamation of public officials. reputation.
D.P. Choudhary v. Kumari Indian Defamation Recognized damages for defamation in Reputation Unreported Rajasthan High
Manjulata (1997) Law Indian tort law. damage. Court bench.

5. Strict and Absolute Liability

Case Name (Year) Principle Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern Judge(s) (Dissent
Involved Highlighted)
M.C. Mehta v. Union of India (Oleum Absolute Replaced strict liability with absolute liability Industrial Bhagwati CJ.
Gas Leak) (1987) Liability for industries in India. accidents.
Cambridge Water Co. v. Eastern Strict Liability Pollution damage requires foreseeability under Environmental Lords Goff, Jauncey.
Counties Leather (1994) strict liability. harm.

6. Recent Cases in Tort Law

Case Name (Year) Principle Crisp One-Line Summary Main Concern Judge(s) (Dissent
Involved Highlighted)
Vishnu Dutt Sharma v. Board of Medical Doctors owe a duty of reasonable care during Professional Ramana CJ,
Governors, AIIMS (2022) Negligence treatment. negligence. Chandrachud.
HDFC Bank v. Kumari Urmila (2021) Bank Liability Banks held liable for wrongful dishonor of Vicarious liability. Lalit J.
cheques under tort principles.
Union Carbide Corporation v. Union Industrial Reaffirmed liability principles for Bhopal Gas Industrial disaster. Chandrachud CJ,
of India (2022) Negligence victims’ rehabilitation. Nariman.
 ENVIROMENTAL LAW
important theories and principles of environmental law,

Theory/Principle Crisp Explanation Propounder/Supporters Criticism Relevant Cases Incorporated in

Section/Act (if any)
Sustainable Development should meet Gro Harlem Brundtland Criticized for being Vellore Citizens Incorporated in
Development present needs without (Brundtland Report, 1987) vague and difficult to Welfare Forum v. National
compromising future implement in policy Union of India Environment Policy
generations’ ability to meet decisions. (1996) (India, 2006).
theirs.
Precautionary Preventive measures Principle 15, Rio Declaration Can lead to A.P. Pollution Explicit in
Principle should be taken when an (1992) overregulation and Control Board v. Environment
activity poses a potential stifling of economic M.V. Nayudu Protection Act
risk to the environment, activities without clear (1999) (1986).
even without full scientific evidence of harm.
certainty.
Polluter Pays The polluter should bear OECD Council (1972), Criticized for being Indian Council for Incorporated in
Principle the cost of preventing or Principle 16, Rio Declaration inequitable in cases Enviro-Legal Environment
rectifying environmental (1992) where polluters cannot Action v. Union of Protection Act
damage caused by their afford to pay or evade India (1996) (1986).
activities. responsibility.
Public Trust Natural resources are held Joseph Sax (American Critics argue it limits M.C. Mehta v. Implied in Indian
Doctrine in trust by the state for the Scholar) state sovereignty over Kamal Nath (1997) Forest Act (1927)
benefit of the public and natural resources. and Article 48A of
future generations. the Constitution.
Intergenerational Present generations hold Edith Brown Weiss Critics argue that Vellore Citizens Implied in Article 21
Equity the environment in trust for current economic Welfare Forum v. of the Constitution
future generations and priorities often override Union of India (Right to Life).
must use it sustainably. long-term (1996)
environmental goals.
Absolute Liability An enterprise engaged in Evolved in M.C. Mehta v. Critics argue it imposes M.C. Mehta v. Incorporated in
Principle hazardous activities is Union of India (1987) excessive burdens on Union of India judgments
absolutely liable for any industries, potentially interpreting Article
 harm caused, regardless of stifling economic (1987) (Oleum Gas 21 of the
intent or negligence. growth. Leak Case) Constitution.
Environmental Advocates fair treatment Evolved from civil rights Critics argue that its Orissa Mining Implicit in Forest
Justice and involvement of all movements scope is too broad and Corporation v. Rights Act (2006).
people in environmental overlaps with other Ministry of
laws, policies, and their social justice concerns. Environment
enforcement. (2013)
Doctrine of Public Prohibits actions or Rooted in common law Critics argue it can be Ratlam Incorporated in
Nuisance omissions that harm public misused to target minor Municipality v. Section 268 of the
health or safety, activities with Vardhichand Indian Penal Code
particularly in negligible impact. (1980) (IPC).
environmental contexts.
Doctrine of Res Certain natural resources, Roman Law Origins Critics argue it M.C. Mehta v. Incorporated in
Extra Commercium such as water, are not conflicts with Kamal Nath (1997) Article 21 and
subject to private privatization efforts in Article 39(b) of the
ownership and are held in resource management. Constitution.
public trust.
Doctrine of Riparian Riparian owners have the Rooted in English common Critics argue it does not State of Tamil Implied in Indian
Rights right to use water flowing law account for modern Nadu v. State of Easements Act
through their land water-sharing Karnataka (1882).
reasonably and equitably. challenges across (Cauvery Water
regions and states. Dispute)
Carbon Trading Assigns tradable carbon Kyoto Protocol (1997) Critics argue it allows No significant case Incorporated in
Principle credits to regulate and polluters to buy in India yet; used Energy
reduce greenhouse gas compliance rather than globally. Conservation Act
emissions. genuinely reduce (2001).
emissions.
Doctrine of Natural resources should Principle 4, Rio Declaration Critics argue it often Narmada Bachao Reflected in
Sustainable Use be used sustainably to (1992) prioritizes economic Andolan v. Union Environment
balance environmental and use over environmental of India (2000) Protection Act
economic needs. conservation. (1986) and policies.
Doctrine of Projects should be Introduced globally in the Critics argue that EIAs Goa Foundation v. Mandatory under
Environmental evaluated for potential Stockholm Declaration can be manipulated to Union of India Environment
Impact Assessment environmental harm before (1972) favor development (2014) Protection Act
(EIA) approval. projects. (1986) and EIA
Notification (2006).
Doctrine of Polluter Emphasizes the Evolved in OECD and Critics argue that Sterlite Industries Incorporated in
Responsibility accountability of polluters Indian jurisprudence enforcement (India) Ltd. v. Environment
to compensate for and mechanisms are weak, Union of India Protection Act
rectify the environmental and accountability is (2013) (1986).
damage caused. often evaded.

TREATIES AND CONVENTIONS

Name of Focus Year Important Clauses

Treaty/Convention
Stockholm Declaration Global environmental 1972 Principle 1: Human right to a clean and healthy
(UN Conference on the protection, sustainable environment.
Human Environment) development Principle 21: States' sovereignty over natural resources.
Montreal Protocol on Phasing out ozone-depleting 1987 Article 2: Control measures for CFCs and halons.
Substances that Deplete substances Article 5: Assistance to developing countries in meeting
the Ozone Layer obligations.
Kyoto Protocol Reducing greenhouse gas 1997 Article 3: Binding targets for GHG reductions.
(GHG) emissions Article 17: Mechanisms like emissions trading.
Annex B: Reduction targets.
Paris Agreement Limiting global warming to 2015 Article 4: Nationally Determined Contributions
below 2°C, pursuing efforts (NDCs).
to limit to 1.5°C Article 6: Market and non-market mechanisms.
Article 9: Climate finance.
United Nations Stabilizing GHG 1992 Article 3: Principles of equity and common but
Framework Convention concentrations in the differentiated responsibilities.
on Climate Change atmosphere Article 4: Commitments to limit emissions.
(UNFCCC)
Convention on Biological Conservation and 1992 Article 6: National strategies for biodiversity
Diversity (CBD) sustainable use of conservation.
biodiversity Article 8: In-situ conservation.
Article 15: Access to genetic resources.
Basel Convention on Transboundary movements 1989 Article 4: Minimize waste generation.
Hazardous Wastes of hazardous waste Article 9: Illegal traffic in hazardous waste.
Annex II: List of controlled substances.
Rotterdam Convention Prior informed consent 1998 Article 5: Procedures for listing chemicals in Annex III.
(PIC) for hazardous Annex III: List of chemicals requiring prior informed
chemicals and pesticides consent.
Ramsar Convention on Conservation and wise use 1971 Article 2: Listing of Wetlands of International
Wetlands of wetlands Importance.
Article 3: National plans for wetland conservation.
CITES (Convention on Regulation of trade in 1973 Appendix I: Species threatened with extinction (strict
International Trade in endangered species regulation).
Endangered Species) Appendix II: Species not necessarily threatened but
trade must be controlled.
Vienna Convention for Protection of the ozone 1985 Article 2: Cooperation on research.
the Protection of the layer Article 5: Financial and technical assistance for
Ozone Layer developing countries.
Agenda 21 (Rio Summit) Comprehensive action plan 1992 Chapter 9: Atmospheric protection.
for sustainable development Chapter 11: Combating deforestation.
Chapter 20: Management of hazardous waste.
Nagoya Protocol Access to genetic resources 2010 Article 6: Prior informed consent for access.
(Supplement to CBD) and benefit-sharing Article 15: Compliance with domestic legislation.
Article 22: Capacity building.
Cartagena Protocol on Regulation of genetically 2000 Article 10: Decision-making procedure for GMO
Biosafety modified organisms imports.
(GMOs) Article 18: Handling, transport, and packaging of
GMOs.
Minamata Convention Controlling mercury 2013 Article 4: Phase-out of mercury-added products.
on Mercury emissions and usage Article 7: Control measures for artisanal and small-scale
gold mining.
World Heritage Protection of cultural and 1972 Article 4: Obligations to protect heritage.
Convention natural heritage Article 11: Listing of World Heritage Sites.
United Nations Combating desertification 1994 Article 3: Principles of participation and partnership.
Convention to Combat and land degradation Article 10: National Action Programs (NAPs).
Desertification (UNCCD)
Espoo Convention Environmental Impact 1991 Article 2: Obligation to notify affected states.
Assessment (EIA) for Appendix I: List of activities requiring EIA.
transboundary projects
RELEVANT CASES
Case Name Section/Act Summary Main Concern Judges (Dissent
Highlighted)
M.C. Mehta v. Union of Article 21, Constitution of Absolute liability for Environmental Pollution Chief Justice P.N. Bhagwati,
India (1986) India; Water Act, 1974 hazardous industries Justice Ranganath Misra
established.
Vellore Citizens’ Welfare Article 21, Constitution; Introduced Industrial Pollution Justice Kuldip Singh
Forum v. UOI (1996) Water Act, 1974; Precautionary Principle
Environment (Protection) and Polluter Pays
Act, 1986 Principle.
Indian Council for Article 21, Constitution; Liability for Industrial Waste and Justice B.P. Jeevan Reddy,
Enviro-Legal Action Environment (Protection) environmental damage Pollution Justice S.C. Agarwal
(1996) Act, 1986 by hazardous industries.
Rural Litigation and Article 32, Constitution of Ecological balance case Quarrying and Mining Chief Justice P.N. Bhagwati
Entitlement Kendra India related to quarrying and
(1985) mining.
T.N. Godavarman Forest (Conservation) Act, Expanded the definition Forest Conservation Justice Y.K. Sabharwal
Thirumulpad v. UOI 1980 of "forest" and
(1995) emphasized its
conservation.
M.C. Mehta v. Kamal Article 48A, Constitution of Applied Public Trust Encroachment on Justice Kuldip Singh, Justice
Nath (1997) India; Public Trust Doctrine Doctrine to protect Natural Resources S. Saghir Ahmad
rivers and resources.
Ganga Pollution Case Water Act, 1974 Ordered closure of Water Pollution Justice P.N. Bhagwati
(1988) tanneries polluting the
Ganga.
Subhash Kumar v. State Article 21, Constitution of Right to clean water Environmental Rights Justice K.N. Singh, Justice
of Bihar (1991) India and air as part of Right N.D. Ojha
to Life.
Narmada Bachao Article 21, Constitution; Approved dam Displacement due to Justice B.N. Kirpal
Andolan v. UOI (2000) Environmental Impact construction with Large Projects (Majority), Justice S.P.
Assessment Notification, rehabilitation measures. Bharucha (Dissenting)
1994
Essar Oil Ltd. v. Halar Article 21, Constitution of Dealt with Environmental Justice Ruma Pal, Justice
Utkarsh Samiti (2004) India environmental Clearance Arijit Pasayat
clearance for industrial
projects.
Church of God (Full Article 21, Constitution of Emphasized citizens' Noise Pollution Justice M.B. Shah
Gospel) v. K.K.R. India; Noise Pollution right to a peaceful and
Majestic (2000) (Regulation and Control) noise-free environment.
Rules, 2000
M.C. Mehta v. Union of Article 32, Constitution of Introduced the principle Industrial Hazard and Chief Justice P.N. Bhagwati
India (Oleum Gas Leak, India of absolute liability for Public Safety
1987) industrial hazards.
Sterlite Industries v. Article 21, Constitution of Closure of the Sterlite Industrial Pollution and Justice R. Banumathi, Justice
Tamil Nadu Pollution India; Air and Water Acts plant for violating Public Health A.S. Bopanna
Control Board (2019) environmental
regulations.
Bangalore Medical Trust Article 21, Constitution; Prohibited the Urban Environmental Justice K. Ramaswamy
v. B.S. Muddappa (1991) Karnataka Town and conversion of public Protection
Country Planning Act parks into private
spaces.
M.P. Pollution Control Article 21, Constitution of Discussed the role of Environmental Justice Justice S.B. Sinha
Board v. Nayudu (1999) India the judiciary in
adjudicating
environmental disputes.
A.P. Pollution Control Article 21, Constitution; Emphasized Environmental Justice S.B. Sinha
Board v. Prof. M.V. Water (Prevention and precautionary measures Governance
Nayudu (1999) Control of Pollution) Act, in environmental
1974 decision-making.
Tehri Dam Case (2004) Environmental Impact Approved dam Dam Construction and Justice M.B. Shah, Justice
Assessment Notification, construction while Environmental Impact Arun Kumar
1994 balancing development
and environment.
S. Jagannath v. Union of Article 21, Constitution of Prohibited aquaculture Coastal Regulation Justice Kuldip Singh
India (1997) India in coastal areas due to
environmental
degradation.
V.K. Krishna Iyer v. Article 32, Constitution of Highlighted the need Environmental Activism Justice Krishna Iyer
State of Rajasthan (2000) India for judicial intervention
in environmental
matters.

INTERNATIONAL LAW
 Theory Crisp Explanation Propounder/Supporters Criticism Incorporated in Section/Act
(if any)
Natural Law Theory International law is based on Hugo Grotius, Francisco de Criticized for being vague, Found in UN Charter
universal moral principles derived Vitoria subjective, and impractical in (Preamble) emphasizing
from human nature or divine will. addressing contemporary legal justice, human rights, and
issues. equality.
Positivist Theory International law is derived from John Austin, Hans Kelsen Overlooks moral dimensions Reflected in Vienna
the consent of states and is and assumes states always act Convention on the Law of
binding only because of rationally in adhering to Treaties (1969).
agreements between sovereign agreements.
nations.
Realist Theory International law is shaped by the Hans Morgenthau, E.H. Ignores the role of international No explicit incorporation;
self-interest and power politics of Carr institutions and norms in often reflects political realities
states rather than legal principles promoting cooperation and in UN Security Council
or morality. resolving conflicts. operations.
Consent Theory International law is binding Vattel, H.L.A. Hart Criticized for failing to explain Implied in ICJ Statute
because states have explicitly or obligations imposed without (Article 36) regarding
implicitly consented to it. direct consent, such as jurisdiction based on state
customary international law. consent.
Command Theory International law is a set of John Austin Criticized for lacking a global Not incorporated; inconsistent
commands issued by a sovereign sovereign; international law is with decentralized
(e.g., a global authority) and more about cooperation than international legal systems.
enforced through sanctions. enforcement.
Historical School International law evolves Friedrich Carl von Savigny Limited applicability in modern Basis for customary
organically from the customs and contexts due to rapid global international law under ICJ
traditions of nations. changes and diverging cultural Statute (Article 38).
norms.
Functionalism International law arises out of the David Mitrany, Inis Claude Fails to address non- Reflected in treaties like the
need for states to cooperate in cooperative behavior or UNFCCC (1992) and WTO
areas like trade, environment, and conflicts of interest between agreements.
security for mutual benefit. states.
Critical Legal Studies International law perpetuates Martti Koskenniemi, David Accused of being overly critical Not explicitly incorporated;
(CLS) power imbalances and serves the Kennedy without providing actionable often used in critique of
interests of dominant states rather alternatives for improving global trade and human
than justice or equality. international law. rights treaties.
 Legal Realism International law is what states Oliver Wendell Holmes, Downplays the normative role Reflected in the pragmatic
and institutions actually do, rather Karl Llewellyn of international law and its enforcement of UN
than what they formally agree to. influence on state behavior. resolutions.
Dualist Theory International law and domestic Heinrich Triepel, Anzilotti Criticized for creating barriers Reflected in India under
law are separate systems; to the domestic enforcement of Article 253 of the
international law requires international norms. Constitution (Parliament's
incorporation into domestic law to power to implement treaties).
be enforceable.
Monist Theory International law and domestic Hans Kelsen Overlooks domestic Seen in countries like the
law are part of a single legal sovereignty and the Netherlands, where treaties
system, with international law complexities of incorporating automatically become
prevailing in cases of conflict. international norms into diverse domestic law.
legal systems.
New Haven School Focuses on the process of Myres McDougal, Harold Criticized for its abstract No formal incorporation;
decision-making in international Lasswell approach and lack of concrete influences policy-oriented
law, emphasizing the interplay of legal principles. jurisprudence.
law, policy, and ethics.
Economic Analysis of International law is analyzed in Posner, Coase Reduces complex legal and Implicit in treaties like the
International Law terms of economic efficiency, moral issues to simplistic Kyoto Protocol, which
cost-benefit analyses, and economic terms. includes carbon trading
incentives for state compliance. mechanisms.
Feminist Theory International law often Christine Chinkin, Hilary Criticized for being too niche Influences gender-sensitive
marginalizes women's Charlesworth and for sometimes overlooking provisions in CEDAW
perspectives and fails to address broader global challenges. (1979).
gender-based inequities.
Third World Critiques international law as B.S. Chimni, Antony Lacks a cohesive framework for Reflected in debates on WTO
Approaches to perpetuating colonial structures Anghie reforming the international reforms and climate justice.
International Law and inequities between developed legal system.
(TWAIL) and developing nations.

principles of international law

Theory/Principle Crisp Explanation Propounder/Supporters Criticism Relevant Cases Incorporated in

Section/Act (if any)
Natural Law International law is based on Hugo Grotius, Francisco de Vague and subjective; Nuremberg Trials Found in UN
Theory universal moral principles Vitoria lacks clear (1945): Justice for Charter (Preamble)
 derived from human nature enforcement crimes against emphasizing justice
or divine will. mechanisms. humanity based on and human rights.
moral principles.
Positivist Theory International law derives its John Austin, Hans Kelsen Overlooks moral North Sea Reflected in Vienna
authority from the consent of dimensions; ignores Continental Shelf Convention on the
states and is binding only non-consensual Case (1969): Focused Law of Treaties
through explicit agreements. customary norms. on treaty obligations. (1969).
Pacta Sunt Agreements must be kept; Rooted in Roman law; Criticized when used Fisheries Jurisdiction Explicit in Vienna
Servanda binding force of treaties upheld by Grotius to enforce unfair or Case (1974): Convention on the
(Principle) under international law. coerced agreements. Obligation to honor Law of Treaties
agreements. (Article 26).
Realist Theory International law reflects Hans Morgenthau, E.H. Ignores the role of No direct cases but Reflected in
power politics and self- Carr international reflected in state pragmatic
interest of states rather than institutions in fostering behavior during the application of UNSC
legal or moral principles. cooperation. Cold War. resolutions.
Consent Theory International law is binding Vattel, H.L.A. Hart Fails to explain Lotus Case (1927): Implied in ICJ
because states have obligations under Consent as the basis of Statute (Article 36)
explicitly or implicitly customary jurisdiction. regarding
consented to it. international law. jurisdiction.
Dualist Theory International law and Heinrich Triepel, Anzilotti Creates barriers to Visakha v. State of Reflected in Article
domestic law are separate enforcement of Rajasthan (1997): 253 of the Indian
systems; international law international norms Incorporation of Constitution.
needs incorporation into domestically. CEDAW principles.
domestic law for
enforcement.
Monist Theory International law and Hans Kelsen Undermines domestic Trendtex Trading v. Practiced in
domestic law are part of a sovereignty and Central Bank of countries like the
single legal system; overlooks diversity in Nigeria (1977): Monist Netherlands.
international law prevails in legal systems. view in UK courts.
case of conflict.
Principle of Non- Prohibits interference in the Rooted in the Westphalian Criticized when used Nicaragua v. United Reflected in UN
Intervention internal affairs of other system to shield human rights States (1986): Upheld Charter (Article
states, respecting violations under the non-intervention 2(7)).
sovereignty. guise of sovereignty. principle.
Principle of State States are sovereign and Rooted in the Treaty of Challenges arise with Congo v. Uganda Reflected in UN
Sovereignty equal; they have authority Westphalia (1648) globalization and (2005): Violations of Charter (Article
international 2(1)).
 over their territory without obligations limiting sovereignty through
external interference. sovereignty. military actions.
Principle of Self- Peoples have the right to Woodrow Wilson, UNGA Criticized for Western Sahara Reflected in UN
Determination freely determine their ambiguity in defining Advisory Opinion Charter (Article
political status and pursue "peoples" and conflicts (1975): Validated self- 1(2)) and ICCPR
economic, social, and with territorial determination. (Article 1).
cultural development. integrity of states.
Principle of Non- Prohibits the use of force in UN Charter framers Criticized for being Corfu Channel Case Explicit in UN
Use of Force international relations except ineffective due to lack (1949): Addressed use Charter (Article
in self-defense or under of enforcement of force. 2(4)).
UNSC authorization. mechanisms.
Principle of Jus Certain fundamental norms ICJ and Vienna Convention Lack of clarity on Barcelona Traction Explicit in Vienna
Cogens (e.g., prohibition of supporters identifying all jus Case (1970): Convention (Article
genocide, slavery) are cogens norms; limited Recognized erga omnes 53).
peremptory and cannot be enforcement. obligations.
violated by any state.
Principle of Equity Equity allows for fair and Rooted in Roman and Criticized for being Gabcikovo- Recognized in ICJ
just outcomes, common law traditions too discretionary and Nagymaros Case Statute (Article
supplementing strict legal subjective. (1997): Applied equity 38(2)).
rules in international in dispute resolution.
disputes.
Principle of Certain crimes (e.g., piracy, Grotius, modern Criticized for being Eichmann Trial Incorporated in
Universal genocide, crimes against international law scholars abused for political (1961): Universal statutes like the
Jurisdiction humanity) can be prosecuted purposes. jurisdiction for war Rome Statute of the
by any state regardless of crimes. ICC.
where they occur.

CONVENTION AND TREATIES

Name of Treaty/Convention Focus Year Important Clauses

Treaty of Westphalia Sovereignty and non- 1648 Established the principles of sovereignty, equality of states,
interference and non-intervention in domestic affairs.
Vienna Convention on the Rules for treaty formation 1969 Article 2: Definition of treaties.
Law of Treaties and interpretation Article 31: General rule of interpretation.
Article 46: Invalidity due to violation of internal law.
 Geneva Conventions Humanitarian law during 1949 Convention I-IV: Protection of wounded, prisoners of war,
armed conflicts and civilians.
Common Article 3: Provisions for non-international armed
conflicts.
UN Charter Founding document of the 1945 Article 2(4): Prohibition of use of force.
United Nations Chapter VII: UN Security Council powers.
Article 51: Right to self-defense.
Statute of the International Jurisdiction and procedures 1945 Article 36: Jurisdiction of the ICJ.
Court of Justice (ICJ) of the ICJ Article 59: Binding nature of ICJ decisions for parties to
the case.
Rome Statute of the Establishing the ICC to 1998 Article 5: Crimes within ICC jurisdiction.
International Criminal Court prosecute war crimes, Article 17: Admissibility criteria.
genocide, and crimes Article 25: Individual criminal responsibility.
against humanity
Hague Conventions Laws of war and neutrality 1899, 1907 Convention IV: Protection of civilians and property.
Convention V: Rights and duties of neutral states.
Montevideo Convention on Criteria for statehood and 1933 Article 1: Criteria for statehood (permanent population,
the Rights and Duties of rights of states defined territory, government, capacity to enter relations).
States
UNCLOS (United Nations Maritime law and 1982 Article 3: Territorial sea limit of 12 nautical miles.
Convention on the Law of the jurisdiction Article 56: Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ).
Sea) Article 76: Continental shelf.
Vienna Convention on Diplomatic immunity and 1961 Article 22: Inviolability of diplomatic premises.
Diplomatic Relations privileges Article 29: Diplomatic immunity of the head of mission.
Vienna Convention on Consular immunity and 1963 Article 36: Right to consular access for detained nationals.
Consular Relations functions Article 55: Abuse of consular privileges.
Convention on the Defining and preventing 1948 Article 1: Obligation to prevent and punish genocide.
Prevention and Punishment genocide Article 3: Acts punishable under genocide.
of the Crime of Genocide
Convention on the Women's rights and gender 1979 Article 2: Obligation to eliminate discrimination.
Elimination of All Forms of equality Article 11: Equal employment opportunities.
Discrimination Against Article 16: Equality in marriage.
Women (CEDAW)
International Covenant on Protection of civil and 1966 Article 6: Right to life.
Civil and Political Rights political rights Article 14: Right to a fair trial.
(ICCPR) Article 19: Freedom of expression.
International Covenant on Economic, social, and 1966 Article 7: Right to just and favorable work conditions.
Economic, Social and cultural rights Article 11: Right to an adequate standard of living.
Cultural Rights (ICESCR)
Convention Relating to the Protection of refugees and 1951 Article 1: Definition of a refugee.
Status of Refugees asylum seekers Article 33: Prohibition of expulsion (non-refoulement).
International Labour Rights of workers and labor Various Convention 87: Freedom of association.
Organization Conventions standards Convention 98: Right to collective bargaining.
(ILO) Convention 138: Minimum age.
Kyoto Protocol Reduction of greenhouse 1997 Article 3: Emission reduction targets.
gases Article 6: Mechanisms for carbon trading.
Paris Agreement Combatting climate change 2015 Article 4: Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs).
Article 6: Market mechanisms.
Convention on Biological Conservation and 1992 Article 6: National strategies for biodiversity.
Diversity (CBD) sustainable use of Article 15: Access to genetic resources.
biodiversity

SETTLEMENT OF INTERNATIONAL DISPUTE

Case Name Relevant Treaties/Principles Summary Main Concern Judges (Dissent
Highlighted)
Corfu Channel Case UN Charter, Sovereign Held that Albania was responsible for State Responsibility International Court of
(1949) Responsibility not warning about mines in its waters. Justice (ICJ)
Reparation for Injuries UN Charter, Legal Personality of Established the UN's capacity to bring International Legal ICJ
Case (1949) International Organizations claims for damages to its agents. Personality
Barcelona Traction Case Diplomatic Protection, Corporate Defined rules on diplomatic protection Diplomatic ICJ
(1970) Responsibility of corporate entities. Protection
Nicaragua v. United Customary International Law, Found the U.S. guilty of violating Use of Force and ICJ
States (1986) Non-Intervention Nicaragua's sovereignty through support State Sovereignty
of Contra rebels.
United States v. Alvarez- Extradition Treaties Ruled on the legality of abduction for Extradition and U.S. Supreme Court
Machain (1992) trial without breaching extradition Jurisdiction
treaties.
S.S. Lotus Case (1927) Jurisdiction, Territorial Established the principle that states Jurisdiction and Permanent Court of
Sovereignty have jurisdiction unless prohibited by Sovereignty International Justice
international law. (PCIJ)
Trail Smelter Case Transboundary Pollution, No Held Canada liable for cross-border Environmental Arbitral Tribunal
(1938, 1941) Harm Principle pollution affecting the U.S. Responsibility
Island of Palmas Case Sovereignty, Effective Occupation Established that effective control is key Territorial Disputes Arbitral Tribunal
(1928) to territorial sovereignty disputes.
Western Sahara Case Self-Determination, ICJ recognized the principle of self- Self-Determination ICJ
(1975) Decolonization determination in the context of and Sovereignty
decolonization.
South West Africa Cases Mandates System Rejected claims on apartheid-related Human Rights and ICJ (Majority), Justice
(1966) violations due to lack of legal standing. Legal Standing Tanaka (Dissenting)
Advisory Opinion on International Humanitarian Law, Declared that use of nuclear weapons is Legality of Nuclear ICJ
Nuclear Weapons (1996) Customary Law generally contrary to international law. Weapons
Fisheries Jurisdiction Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ), Upheld Iceland's right to extend fishing Maritime Boundaries ICJ
Case (1974) UNCLOS zones under customary international
law.
Chorzów Factory Case State Responsibility, Reparations Established the principle of "reparation State Responsibility PCIJ
(1928) must, as far as possible, wipe out all and Reparations
consequences."
Avena Case (Mexico v. Vienna Convention on Consular Held that the U.S. violated consular Diplomatic and ICJ
U.S.) (2004) Relations notification rights of Mexican nationals Consular Relations
on death row.
Whaling in the Antarctic International Convention for the Declared Japan's whaling program as Environmental Law ICJ
(Australia v. Japan) Regulation of Whaling not meeting scientific research criteria. and Biodiversity
(2014)
Bosnian Genocide Case Genocide Convention Held Serbia responsible for failing to Genocide and State ICJ
(2007) prevent genocide in Srebrenica. Responsibility
United States v. Iran Diplomatic Immunity, Vienna Declared Iran violated diplomatic Diplomatic Immunity ICJ
(Hostages Case) (1980) Convention on Diplomatic immunity by holding U.S. diplomats
Relations hostage.
East Timor Case (1995) Self-Determination, Sovereignty Affirmed East Timor's right to self- Self-Determination ICJ
determination under international law. and Occupation
Arrest Warrant Case Sovereign Immunity Held that sitting ministers of foreign Diplomatic Immunity ICJ
(2002) states enjoy immunity from criminal
prosecution abroad.
Pulp Mills Case (2010) Environmental Law, Balanced development and Environmental ICJ
Transboundary Pollution environmental obligations in cross- Governance
border industrial projects.
North Sea Continental UNCLOS, Customary Set principles for equitable delimitation Maritime Boundaries ICJ
Shelf Cases (1969) International Law of continental shelves.

List of scholar with their philosophies (based on Stanford Encyclopedia)

No. Name of Birth Notable Work Theory Propounded Applicability in International Criticized by Scholar (if any)
Scholar Year Law
1 Hugo Grotius 1583 De Jure Belli ac Pacis Natural Law & Just War Established the foundation of Criticized for not addressing
modern international law. colonialism adequately.
2 Immanuel Kant 1724 Perpetual Peace: A Cosmopolitanism and Influenced the development of Criticized for idealism and
Philosophical Sketch Federation of States the United Nations concept. impracticality.
3 Hans Kelsen 1881 The Pure Theory of Law Positivist Theory of Advocated for the primacy of Realists like Morgenthau
International Law international legal norms. questioned its real-world
utility.
4 Carl Schmitt 1888 The Concept of the Critique of Liberal Questioned the liberal Criticized for aligning with
Political Internationalism framework of international law. authoritarian regimes.
5 Martti 1953 From Apology to Utopia Critical Legal Studies Analyzes the indeterminacy of Criticized for being overly
Koskenniemi international legal arguments. theoretical.
6 John Tasioulas Modern Contemporary writings Philosophy of Focuses on integrating moral Positivists critique reliance on
on human rights International Justice principles into law. moral theory.

Scholars of International Law (Updated)

No. Name of Scholar Birth Notable Work Theory Propounded Applicability in International Criticized by Scholar (if any)
Year Law
1 Hugo Grotius 1583 De Jure Belli ac Pacis Natural Law Theory Foundational principles of jus Criticized by positivists like
(On the Law of War and of International Law gentium (law of nations). John Austin for relying on
Peace) natural law principles.
2 Thomas Hobbes 1588 Leviathan Sovereignty and Stressed the centrality of Criticized by liberal theorists
State-Centrism sovereign states in international for neglecting global
relations. cooperation.
3 Lassa Oppenheim 1858 International Law: A Positivist Approach to Codified international law Criticized by Hersch
Treatise International Law principles focusing on state Lauterpacht for ignoring
sovereignty. individual rights in
international law.
4 J.G. Starke 1900 Introduction to Comprehensive Stressed practical applications of Criticized by radical theorists
International Law Practical Approach international law principles. for being overly positivist.
5 Emmerich de 1714 The Law of Nations Theory of State Advocated for equal sovereignty Criticized by Grotius for
Vattel Equality of all states. insufficient emphasis on
natural law.
6 Hans Kelsen 1881 Pure Theory of Law Legal Positivism Advocated for a hierarchical Criticized by H.L.A. Hart for
system of norms; international overemphasis on normativity.
law as "Grundnorm."
7 Hersch 1897 The Function of Law in Humanization of Stressed individual rights within Criticized by positivists for
Lauterpacht the International International Law the international legal undermining state sovereignty.
Community framework.
8 Georg 1908 Power Politics Realism in Highlighted power dynamics in Criticized by liberal scholars
Schwarzenberger International Law shaping international law. for sidelining human rights
norms.
9 Jeremy Bentham 1748 Introduction to Principles Positivism in Introduced the term Criticized by natural law
of Morals and Legislation International Law “international law” and scholars for neglecting
emphasized laws based on state universal norms.
consent.
10 Philip Jessup 1897 Transnational Law Theory of Stressed that laws must regulate Criticized by traditionalists for
Transnational Law both public and private diluting state-centric
international interactions. perspectives.
11 Martti 1953 From Apology to Utopia Critical Legal Studies Exposed contradictions in Criticized by formalists for
Koskenniemi international law as a mix of lacking concrete legal
utopian and apologetic elements. solutions.
12 Rosalyn Higgins 1937 Problems and Process: Problem-Oriented Advocated for practical Criticized by strict positivists
International Law and Approach application of international law for pragmatic deviations.
How We Use It in resolving disputes.
13 Francisco de 1483 De Indis et de Jure Belli Theory of Just War Established the basis for laws Criticized by anti-colonial
Vitoria Reflectiones governing war and colonialism. theorists for legitimizing
conquest.
14 Carl Schmitt 1888 The Concept of the Theory of Sovereign Emphasized sovereign states’ Criticized by liberal scholars
Political Exceptionalism authority to determine exceptions for undermining international
to international norms. cooperation.
15 Antonio Cassese 1937 International Law Normative Advocated for institutional Criticized by skeptics for
Institutionalism frameworks for human rights and relying heavily on institutional
international crimes. efficacy.

INDIAN PENAL CODE

Theory/Principle Crisp Explanation Propounder/Supporters Criticism Relevant Cases Incorporated in

Section/Act of IPC
(if any)
Retributive Theory Criminals deserve Immanuel Kant, Hegel Criticized for focusing Bachan Singh v. State of Reflected in Section
punishment on revenge rather than Punjab (1980): Upheld 302 (Punishment for
proportionate to their reform. death penalty as retributive murder).
crime to restore moral justice in rare cases.
balance.
Deterrent Theory Punishment aims to Jeremy Bentham Criticized for its Kartar Singh v. State of Reflected in Section
deter the offender and inability to prevent Punjab (1994): 376 (Punishment for
others from committing crimes committed Emphasized deterrence rape).
crimes. impulsively or under against terrorism.
emotional distress.
Reformative Punishment aims to Cesare Beccaria, Critics argue it may Mohd. Giasuddin v. State Implied in Section
Theory reform and rehabilitate Mahatma Gandhi overlook the needs of of Andhra Pradesh 360 (Order to release
the offender for victims and public (1977): Advocated on probation).
reintegration into safety. reformative justice.
society.
Preventive Theory Focuses on preventing Rooted in utilitarian Criticized for its Union of India v. V. Implied in Section
crime by incapacitating principles overemphasis on Sriharan (2016): Life 376E (Punishment
the offender through isolation and neglect of imprisonment for for repeat offenders).
imprisonment or other individual rights. incapacitation.
means.
Restorative Justice Aims to reconcile the Howard Zehr, Tony Critics argue it may not State of Gujarat v. Afroz Implied in Section
offender with the victim Marshall be suitable for heinous Mohammed Hasanfatta 89 (Compromise in
and the community by crimes. (2019): Encouraged certain cases).
addressing the harm victim-offender
caused. reconciliation.
Doctrine of Mens A guilty mind (intention Rooted in Roman law Criticized for allowing State of Maharashtra v. Reflected in
Rea (Guilty Mind) or knowledge) is exceptions in strict M.H. George (1965): Sections 299, 300
essential for criminal liability offenses. Emphasized mens rea in (Culpable homicide
liability. smuggling cases. and murder).
Doctrine of Actus A voluntary act or Rooted in English Critics argue that Kedarnath v. State of Found in various
Reus (Guilty Act) omission that constitutes common law involuntary actions due Bihar (1962): Sedition as sections of IPC
a crime. to coercion or duress an actus reus. requiring a criminal
blur the doctrine's act.
application.
Doctrine of Strict Liability without proof Rylands v. Fletcher Critics argue it may be R.K. Karanjia v. Reflected in Section
Liability of mens rea in certain (1868) unfair in cases of Goodluck Agencies 292 (Obscenity).
offenses. unavoidable accidents. (1956): Applied strict
liability in obscenity laws.
Doctrine of A person may be held Rooted in English law Criticized for punishing Sitaram Motilal Kalal v. Implied in Section
Vicarious Liability liable for the acts of individuals not directly Santanuprasad (1966): 499 (Defamation).
others, such as involved in the crime. Employer liability.
employers for
employees.
Doctrine of Criminal acts may be Rooted in natural law Critics argue it creates a Dudley and Stephens Implied in Section
Necessity excused if committed to principles slippery slope for (1884): Necessity as a 81 (Act done to
prevent greater harm. justifying crimes. defense in cannibalism. avoid harm).
Doctrine of Reduced liability for Evolved in English law Critics argue it can be State of Rajasthan v. Reflected in Section
Diminished mentally ill offenders abused to escape full Shera Ram (2012): 84 (Insanity
Responsibility who lack full accountability. Mental illness considered defense).
understanding of their for reduced punishment.
actions.
Doctrine of Malicious intent Rooted in English Criticized for extending Virsa Singh v. State of Reflected in Section
Transfer of Malice directed at one person common law liability beyond original Punjab (1958): Applied 301 (Culpable
but results in harm to intent. transferred malice in homicide by
another still holds the murder. transferred
offender liable. intention).
Principle of Double A person cannot be tried Rooted in Magna Carta Critics argue it may Maqbool Hussain v. State Incorporated in
Jeopardy or punished twice for limit the correction of of Bombay (1953): Article 20(2) of the
the same offense. judicial errors. Double jeopardy in Constitution.
customs cases.
Doctrine of Punishment must be Cesare Beccaria Critics argue it may lead Maneka Gandhi v. Union Implied in Sections
Proportionality proportional to the to lenient punishments of India (1978): Principle 302, 376 (Murder,
gravity of the offense. for white-collar crimes. applied to laws restricting rape).
personal liberty.
Doctrine of Acts done with Rooted in common law Critics argue it is Shivaji Sahebrao Bobade Reflected in
Malafide Intention malicious intent are principles challenging to prove v. State of Maharashtra Sections 299-300
liable for harsher intent conclusively. (1973): Focused on intent (Homicide and
penalties. in murder. murder).

Case Name Section(s) of IPC Summary Main Concern Judges (Dissent

Highlighted)
K.M. Nanavati v. State of Section 302 (Murder), Examined the application of "grave and Murder, Provocation, Justice A.K. Sarkar,
Maharashtra (1962) Section 300 (Exception 1) sudden provocation" as a defense in and Culpable Justice K. Subba Rao
murder. Homicide (Dissenting)
Bachan Singh v. State of Section 302 (Murder), Upheld the constitutional validity of the Capital Punishment Chief Justice Y.V.
Punjab (1980) Doctrine of Rarest of Rare death penalty under the "rarest of rare" Chandrachud, Justice
doctrine. Bhagwati
Macchi Singh v. State of Section 302 (Murder), Elaborated on the criteria for imposing Capital Punishment Justice M.P. Thakkar
Punjab (1983) Doctrine of Rarest of Rare the death penalty.
State of Maharashtra v. Section 304 (Culpable Convicted Salman Khan for rash and Culpable Homicide Justice A.R. Joshi
Salman Khan (2015) Homicide not amounting negligent driving, causing death.
to Murder)
Fazal Rahman v. State of Section 304B (Dowry Clarified the evidentiary requirements Dowry Death Justice D.A. Desai
Bihar (1986) Death) for dowry death cases.
Gian Kaur v. State of Punjab Section 309 (Attempt to Upheld the validity of Section 309 and Suicide and Right to Justice J.S. Verma
(1996) Suicide) ruled that the right to life does not Life
include the right to die.
Aruna Shanbaug v. Union of Section 309 (Attempt to Allowed passive euthanasia under strict Euthanasia and Right Justice Markandey Katju
India (2011) Suicide), Article 21 guidelines. to Dignity
Rupan Deol Bajaj v. K.P.S. Section 354 (Assault to Convicted K.P.S. Gill for outraging the Women's Safety Justice S.C. Agrawal
Gill (1996) Outrage Modesty) modesty of Rupan Deol Bajaj.
Tukaram v. State of Section 376 (Rape) Acquitted accused citing lack of Consent in Rape Justice A.D. Koshal
Maharashtra (Mathura Rape evidence of non-consensual intercourse. Cases (Majority)
Case) (1979)
Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan Section 354 (Outraging Laid down guidelines for prevention of Sexual Harassment Justice J.S. Verma,
(1997) Modesty), Article 21 sexual harassment at the workplace. Justice Sujata Manohar
Shreya Singhal v. Union of Section 499 (Defamation), Struck down Section 66A of IT Act, Defamation and Justice Rohinton
India (2015) Freedom of Speech highlighting protection of free speech Freedom of Nariman
under Article 19(1)(a). Expression
Devinder Singh v. State of Section 300, Exception 4 Explained "sudden fight" as a Culpable Homicide Justice S.S. Nijjar
Punjab (2014) (Culpable Homicide) mitigating circumstance in homicide
cases.
Rajagopal v. State of Tamil Section 499 (Defamation) Clarified that public officials cannot Right to Privacy vs. Justice Jeevan Reddy
Nadu (Auto Shankar Case) suppress legitimate criticism through Public Interest
(1994) defamation laws.
Laxmi v. Union of India Section 326A (Acid Directed stricter regulation of acid sales Acid Attack and Justice R.M. Lodha
(2014) Attack) and improved compensation for Victim Rights
victims.
Govind v. State of Madhya Section 503 (Criminal Established the balance between Right to Privacy Justice K.K. Mathew
Pradesh (1975) Intimidation) individual privacy and state
surveillance.
Navtej Singh Johar v. Union Section 377 (Unnatural Decriminalized consensual homosexual LGBTQ+ Rights Chief Justice Dipak
of India (2018) Offenses) acts between adults. Misra, Justice Indu
Malhotra
 Joseph Shine v. Union of India Section 497 (Adultery) Struck down Section 497, declaring it Gender Equality and Chief Justice Dipak
(2018) unconstitutional for violating gender Marital Rights Misra, Justice D.Y.
equality. Chandrachud
State of Tamil Nadu v. Nalini Section 302 (Murder), Convicted conspirators in the Criminal Conspiracy Justice K.T. Thomas
(Rajiv Gandhi Assassination Section 120B (Criminal assassination of Rajiv Gandhi.
Case) (1999) Conspiracy)
Sheila Barse v. State of Section 376 (Rape) Raised concerns over custodial rape and Custodial Violence Justice P.N. Bhagwati
Maharashtra (1983) the need for special laws for women's and Women's Safety
protection.

Offences Against the Human Body

Name of the Section Section Relevant Cases (Year- Judge(s) Dissenting Opinions (if One-liner Explanation
Crime in IPC in BNS wise) any)
Culpable 299 101 R v Govinda (1876) Justice Melvill None Differentiated culpable homicide
Homicide from murder.
K.M. Nanavati v. State Justices A.K. None Case of sudden provocation in a
of Maharashtra (1962) Sarkar, S.K. Das crime of passion.
Murder 300 102 State of A.P. v. R. Justice P.N. None Clarified the distinction between
Punnayya (1977) Bhagwati murder and culpable homicide.
Bachan Singh v. State of Justice Y.V. Justice P.N. Bhagwati Upheld the constitutional validity
Punjab (1980) Chandrachud dissented on the death of the death penalty under “rarest
penalty's use. of rare” cases.
Attempt to 307 110 State of Maharashtra v. Justice O. None Established guidelines for
Commit Murder Balram Bama Patil Chinnappa Reddy conviction under attempt to
(1983) murder.
Hurt 319 118 Virsa Singh v. State of Justice Vivian None Explained the requirements for
Punjab (1958) Bose proving grievous injury with intent.
Grievous Hurt 320 119 State v. Shiv Kumar Justice Dipak None Assault categorized as causing
Yadav (2016) Misra grievous hurt to a minor victim.
Wrongful 339 133 Bhutnath Mallik v. State Justice A.N. Ray None Wrongful restraint was upheld due
Restraint of West Bengal (1974) to deliberate blocking of
movement.
Wrongful 340 134 A.K. Gopalan v. State of Justice S.R. Das Justice Fazl Ali dissented Addressed constitutional
Confinement Madras (1950) on procedural fairness. safeguards against preventive
detention.
 Criminal Force 350, 351 141, 142 P. Ramanatha Aiyar v. Justice M. None Defined “criminal force” under
and Assault State of Kerala (1964) Hidayatullah IPC with clarity.
Kidnapping 359 153 Sheila Sebastian v. Justice R. None Addressed fraudulent transfer of a
Jawaharaj (2018) Banumathi minor’s custody under false
pretense.
Abduction 362 156 Sham Singh v. State of Justice A.K. Sikri None Clarified the scope of “forceful
Haryana (2017) abduction” for marriage.

Offences Against the State and Terrorism

Name of the Crime Section in Section in BNS Relevant Cases (Year-wise) Judge(s) One-liner Explanation
IPC
Waging War Against 121 35 Kehar Singh v. Union of Justice Ranganath Conviction in Indira Gandhi
the State India (1988) Mishra assassination conspiracy case.
Sedition 124A 37 Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Justice B.P. Sinha Limited sedition law to acts inciting
Bihar (1962) violence or public disorder.
Balwant Singh v. State of Justice K. Raised questions on mere speech and
Punjab (1995) Ramaswamy sedition under IPC.
Conspiracy Against 120B 34 Nalini v. State of Tamil Nadu Justice Thomas, Conviction of accused in the Rajiv
the State (1999) Justice Quadri Gandhi assassination case.
Unlawful Assembly 141 64 Masthan Sahib v. State of Justice S. Mohan Defined “unlawful assembly” under IPC
(Terrorism) Tamil Nadu (1993) with the intent to commit a terrorist act.
Promoting Enmity 153A 67 Manzar Sayeed Khan v. State Justice Altamas Focused on balancing freedom of
Between Groups of Maharashtra (2007) Kabir expression with public order concerns.
Terrorism Not in IPC; Referenced Yakub Memon v. State of Justice A.R. Dave Conviction for involvement in the 1993
UAPA Act indirectly in BNS Maharashtra (2013) Bombay bomb blasts case.

Offences Against Property

Name of the Crime Section in Section in Relevant Cases (Year-wise) Judge(s) One-liner Explanation
IPC BNS
Theft 378 167 Neeraj Dutta v. State (Govt. of Justice S. Abdul Defined circumstances where dishonest
NCT of Delhi) (2022) Nazeer intention constitutes theft.
Extortion 383 171 A. Devendran v. State of Tamil Justice S. Saghir Addressed extortion linked to criminal
Nadu (1997) Ahmad conspiracy.
Robbery 390 179 Bank of India v. Jagjit Singh Justice M. N. Clarified the involvement of fear in
Mehta (1991) Venkatachaliah committing robbery.
 Dacoity 391 180 Mohd. Anwar v. State of Delhi Justice Arijit Pasayat Differentiated dacoity from robbery, focusing
(2004) on participation of five or more.
Criminal 403 188 Krishna Kumar v. Union of Justice K. Focused on dishonest use or conversion of
Misappropriation India (1990) Ramaswamy property.
Criminal Breach of 405 190 State of Gujarat v. Jaswantlal Justice V.R. Krishna Explained the fiduciary relationship in breach
Trust Nathalal (1968) Iyer of trust cases.
Cheating 415 194 Hira Lal Hari Lal Bhagwati v. Justice S.N. Variava Clarified the distinction between cheating and
CBI (2003) misrepresentation.
Mischief 425 206 V. P. Shrivastava v. Indian Justice Dalveer Addressed destruction of property with intent
Explosives Ltd. (2010) Bhandari to cause wrongful loss.
Criminal Trespass 441 211 Rameshwar Dayal v. Banda Justice A.N. Ray Clarified the definition of criminal trespass
(Thakur) (1973) with intent to commit an offense.

Offences Against Women and Children

Name of the Section in IPC Section in Relevant Cases (Year-wise) Judge(s) One-liner Explanation
Crime BNS
Rape 375 63 Tukaram v. State of Maharashtra Justice A.D. Koshal Highlighted issues of consent in
(Mathura Case) (1979) rape laws.
Nirbhaya Case (Mukesh & Ors. v. Justice R. Landmark case that reaffirmed
State of NCT of Delhi) (2020) Banumathi death penalty for brutal rape and
murder.
Sexual 354A 354A Vishaka v. State of Rajasthan (1997) Justice J.S. Verma Formulated guidelines for
Harassment preventing workplace sexual
harassment.
Dowry Death 304B 106 Shanti v. State of Haryana (1991) Justice P.B. Sawant Established guidelines for evidence
in dowry death cases.
Domestic Protection of Not directly Indra Sarma v. V.K.V. Sarma (2013) Justice K.S. Focused on recognizing rights of
Violence Women from under BNS Radhakrishnan women in domestic partnerships.
Domestic Violence
Act
Kidnapping and 359, 366 153, 156 Sham Singh v. State of Haryana Justice A.K. Sikri Addressed kidnapping of women
Abduction of (2017) under false pretense for marriage.
Women
 Child Sexual POCSO Act Not directly State v. Shiv Kumar Yadav (2016) Justice Dipak Misra Reinforced child protection laws
Abuse under BNS under POCSO.
Female Infanticide 315 113 P. Rathinam v. Union of India Justice P.B. Sawant Addressed constitutional validity of
(1994) laws against female infanticide.
Cruelty by 498A 137 Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar Justice Cautioned against misuse of
Husband/Relatives (2014) Chandramauli Kr. Section 498A by implementing
Prasad procedural safeguards.

Drug Trafficking and Counterfeiting

Name of the Crime Section in IPC / Section in BNS Relevant Cases (Year- Judge(s) One-liner Explanation
Special Acts wise)
Drug Trafficking Narcotic Drugs and Not directly Mohd. Shahabuddin v. Justice Deepak Clarified sentencing policy under NDPS for
(NDPS Act) Psychotropic under BNS State of Bihar (2010) Verma drug trafficking.
Substances (NDPS)
Act, 1985
State of Punjab v. Justice K. Procedural safeguards for search and
Balbir Singh (1994) Ramaswamy seizure under NDPS Act.
Counterfeiting 489A to 489E 228 to 232 Umashankar v. State of Justice M.B. Shah Differentiated fake currency possession
Chhattisgarh (2001) from intentional circulation.
Counterfeit 255 to 263A 203 to 213 State of Andhra Justice R.P. Sethi Addressed counterfeiting of government
Government Stamps Pradesh v. G. Appaiah revenue stamps and its implications.
(2002)

Offences Against Public Tranquility

Name of the Crime Section in Section in Relevant Cases (Year-wise) Judge(s) One-liner Explanation
IPC BNS
Unlawful Assembly 141 64 Masthan Sahib v. State of Tamil Justice S. Mohan Defined unlawful assembly and intent
Nadu (1993) requirements.
Rioting 146 66 In Re Ramlila Maidan Incident Justice B.S. Examined police action during peaceful protest
(2012) Chauhan turning violent.
Promoting Enmity 153A 67 Manzar Sayeed Khan v. State of Justice Altamas Addressed promotion of enmity through
Between Groups Maharashtra (2007) Kabir publications under IPC.
 Affray 159 70 Emperor v. Bahadur Khan Justice Stone Defined affray as a fight in a public place
(1945) disturbing public peace.
Criminal Conspiracy 120A, 34, 35 Nalini v. State of Tamil Nadu Justice Thomas, Conviction under criminal conspiracy in Rajiv
120B (1999) Justice Quadri Gandhi assassination case.
Public Nuisance 268 140 Ratlam Municipality v. Justice V.R. Recognized public nuisance as violation of
Vardichan (1980) Krishna Iyer fundamental rights to clean environment.

Theories and Types of Punishments

Theory/Type of Relevant Relevant Cases (Year- Judge(s) Dissenting Opinions (if One-liner Explanation
Punishment Section/Act wise) any)
Retributive Philosophical Bachan Singh v. State of Justice Y.V. Justice P.N. Bhagwati Advocates punishment equivalent to
Theory Basis Punjab (1980) Chandrachud dissented on the death the gravity of the crime.
penalty's application.
Deterrent Theory Philosophical Rajendra Prasad v. State Justice Krishna None Punishment intended to deter both
Basis of Uttar Pradesh (1979) Iyer the offender and others from
committing crimes.
Preventive Theory Philosophical State of Gujarat v. R. A. Justice R.M. None Focuses on incapacitating the
Basis Mehta (2013) Lodha offender to prevent future crimes.
Reformative Philosophical Mohd. Giasuddin v. State Justice V.R. None Emphasizes rehabilitation and
Theory Basis of A.P. (1977) Krishna Iyer reintegration of offenders.
Death Penalty 302 IPC Maneka Gandhi v. Union Justice Bhagwati None Set procedural safeguards for
of India (1978) imposition of death penalty.
Imprisonment 53 IPC Sunil Batra v. Delhi Justice V.R. None Discussed humane conditions of
Administration (1980) Krishna Iyer imprisonment.
Fine 63 IPC Ganga Singh v. State of Justice None Focused on financial penalties for
Madhya Pradesh (1959) Hidayatullah crimes.
Forfeiture of 61 IPC Union Carbide Justice R.S. None Highlighted the punitive aspect of
Property (Repealed) Corporation v. Union of Pathak forfeiting property for public safety.
India (1989)
Community State Initiatives Not widely used yet in - None Involves offenders contributing to
Service (Modern) Indian law; applied community welfare as an alternative
globally to imprisonment.

Compensation to Victims of Crime

 Aspect of Relevant Relevant Cases (Year-wise) Judge(s) Dissenting One-liner Explanation
Compensation Section/Act Opinions (if
any)
Restitution Section 357 CrPC Hari Singh v. Sukhbir Singh Justice O. None Allowed courts to direct offenders to
(1988) Chinnappa pay compensation to victims.
Reddy
Compensation by Section 357A CrPC Delhi Domestic Working Justice Sujata V. None Directed states to create victim
State Women's Forum v. Union of Manohar compensation schemes.
India (1995)
Victim Section 357A CrPC Laxmi v. Union of India Justice R.M. None Advocated for state compensation for
Compensation (2014) Lodha acid attack survivors.
Schemes
Compensation for Fatal Accidents Rural Transport Service v. Justice A.C. None Discussed monetary compensation for
Death Act, 1855 Bezlum Bibi (1980) Gupta families of fatal accident victims.
Compensation for Vishakha Nilabati Behera v. State of Justice J.S. None Landmark case recognizing
Rape Victims Guidelines, POCSO Orissa (1993) Verma compensation for custodial rape and
Act rights violations.
Compensation in Public Law D.K. Basu v. State of West Justice Kuldip None Enforced compensation for custodial
Custody Remedies Bengal (1997) Singh violence and death.
Compensation for Article 21 of Maneka Gandhi v. Union of Justice P.N. None Recognized compensation as a
Wrongful Acts Constitution India (1978) Bhagwati remedy for violation of fundamental
rights.

Explanation of Key Sections:

1. Section 357 CrPC: Allows courts to direct offenders to pay compensation to victims directly from fines or penalties.
2. Section 357A CrPC: Mandates the State Government to provide victim compensation schemes.
3. Section 53 IPC: Lists types of punishments available under Indian law.

COMPARISION OF INDIAN CONSTITUTION AND AMERICAN CONSTITUTION

Aspect Relevant Article in Case Law (India) Relevant Article Case Law (USA) Point of Difference
Indian Constitution in US
Constitution
Preamble Not enforceable but Kesavananda Preamble not Jacobson v. Indian Preamble emphasizes socio-
integral Bharati v. State of enforceable Massachusetts (1905) economic justice; US focuses on
(Kesavananda Kerala (1973) liberty, justice, and the pursuit of
Bharati) happiness.
Separation of Not explicitly stated, Indira Gandhi v. Raj Explicit in the Marbury v. Madison India follows a parliamentary system
Powers implied in Articles Narain (1975) doctrine (1803) with fusion of powers; US follows
50, 122, 212 strict separation with a presidential
system.
Amendment Article 368 Kesavananda Article V Dillon v. Gloss (1921) Indian Constitution is easier to amend;
Process Bharati v. State of US requires supermajority and state
Kerala (1973) ratification.
Judicial Review Articles 13, 32, 226 Minerva Mills v. Implied (Marbury Marbury v. Madison Judicial review is explicit in India;
Union of India (1980) v. Madison) (1803) implied in the US.
Fundamental Articles 14-35 Maneka Gandhi v. Bill of Rights Brown v. Board of Indian rights are more detailed and
Rights Union of India (1978) (First 10 Education (1954) include socio-economic rights; US
Amendments) rights focus on civil liberties.
Directive Articles 36-51 Ashok Kumar Not applicable Not applicable Unique to India, aimed at socio-
Principles Thakur v. Union of economic welfare; no equivalent in the
India (2008) US Constitution.
Emergency Articles 352-360 ADM Jabalpur v. Article II, Korematsu v. United India has detailed emergency
Provisions Shivkant Shukla Suspension of States (1944) provisions; US has fewer codified
(1976) Habeas Corpus emergency powers.
Federalism Articles 246, Seventh S.R. Bommai v. Article I, Tenth McCulloch v. India has a quasi-federal structure; US
Schedule Union of India (1994) Amendment Maryland (1819) has a dual federal structure.
Executive Head Article 52 (President) Rameshwar Prasad Article II United States v. Nixon Indian President is a ceremonial head;
v. Union of India (President) (1974) US President is the head of state and
(2006) government.
Legislative Articles 79-122 Shiv Sagar Tiwari v. Article I Schechter Poultry India has a bicameral legislature; so
System (Parliament) Union of India (1997) (Congress) Corp. v. United States does the US, but with stronger Senate
(1935) powers in the latter.
Judiciary Articles 124-147 Keshavananda Article III Roe v. Wade (1973) India has an integrated judiciary; US
Bharati v. State of has a dual judiciary system (federal
Kerala (1973) and state).
Right to Equality Article 14 E.P. Royappa v. Fourteenth Plessy v. Ferguson India guarantees broader socio-
State of Tamil Nadu Amendment (1896) economic equality; US focuses more
(1974) on civil liberties and equal protection.
Freedom of Article 19(1)(a) Shreya Singhal v. First Amendment Brandenburg v. Ohio Indian freedom is subject to
Speech Union of India (2015) (1969) reasonable restrictions; US allows
more expansive free speech
protections.
Abolition of Article 17 State of Karnataka v. Not applicable Not applicable Unique to India; addresses specific
Untouchability Appa Balu Ingale historical and social contexts.
(1993)
Right to Religion Articles 25-28 Bijoe Emmanuel v. First Amendment Church of the Both protect religious freedom, but
State of Kerala Lukumi Babalu Aye India emphasizes secularism more
(1986) v. Hialeah (1993) explicitly.
Right to Article 300A (Legal K.T. Plantation v. Fifth Amendment Kelo v. City of New Right to property is a fundamental
Property Right, not FR) State of Karnataka London (2005) right in the US; in India, it is a
(2011) constitutional/legal right post-44th
Amendment.

Jurisprudence

No. Name of Birth Notable Work Theory Propounded Applicability Criticized by School of Thought
Scholar Year
1 Thomas 1588 Leviathan Social Contract Theory: Applicable in Criticized by John Natural Law/Political
Hobbes People enter into a social understanding the Locke and Jean- Philosophy
contract to create a foundational principles of Jacques Rousseau for
sovereign authority to constitutional law and being overly
maintain peace and state authority. Relevant authoritarian and
prevent chaos. Law is a in political philosophy disregarding
means to avoid the "state and legal theories that individual freedoms.
of nature." prioritize order over
individual freedoms.
2 Jean- 1712 The Social Social Contract Theory: Applicable in the study of Criticized by liberals Social Contract
Jacques Contract Rousseau introduced the democratic systems, like John Stuart Mill Theory/Political
Rousseau idea of the "general will" popular sovereignty, and for promoting Philosophy
– that individuals must constitutional law. collectivism at the
align their personal will Influential in the expense of individual
development of modern freedoms.
 with the collective will of political thought and
the people to form laws. constitutional structures
that emphasize
democracy.
3 David 1711 A Treatise of Empiricism & Applicable in Criticized by Kant for Empiricism/Skepticism
Hume Human Nature Skepticism: Argues that understanding the role of lacking a systematic
law must be based on human psychology and approach to moral
human experience and experience in shaping law and focusing too
observations, rather than legal norms, particularly much on empirical
abstract reason. in understanding the data.
Skepticism about the limitations of legal
power of reason in law. reasoning.
4 Immanuel 1724 Metaphysics of Deontological Ethics: Applicable in fields of Criticized by Natural Law/Deontological
Kant Morals Law is based on moral constitutional law, human utilitarians like Ethics
imperatives and duty, not rights, and areas where Bentham, who argue
just consequences. Laws moral duty and individual that Kant's
must respect individual rights are central to legal deontological
autonomy and moral reasoning. approach is overly
rights. rigid.
5 Jeremy 1748 An Introduction Utilitarianism: Law Influences modern legal Criticized by Legal
Bentham to the Principles should aim to maximize policy, especially in areas Immanuel Kant, who Positivism/Utilitarianism
of Morals and happiness for the greatest such as criminal law and argued that
Legislation number of people. Legal public policy, where the utilitarianism fails to
rules are justified based on consequences of laws are respect individual
their utility to society. important. Common in rights.
cost-benefit analysis in
legal reasoning.
6 Friedrich 1779 System des Historical School of Applicable in Criticized by Auguste Historical School of
Karl von Heutigen Jurisprudence: Law is understanding the role of Comte, who Jurisprudence
Savigny Römischen the result of the historical historical context in the advocated for
Rechts development of the development of law and is positivist approaches,
community’s customs and foundational to legal arguing against the
traditions. Law reflects the systems that emphasize purely historical
people’s national spirit tradition, especially in view.
(Volksgeist). civil law countries like
Germany.
7 John 1790 The Province of Legal Positivism: Law is Applicable in legal Criticized by H.L.A. Analytical
Austin Jurisprudence the command of the systems where law is seen Hart, who argued for Jurisprudence/Legal
Determined sovereign backed by the as a command of the state, a more nuanced Positivism
threat of sanction. Laws and emphasizes state approach to
are valid irrespective of authority and legal understanding the
their moral content. formalism. Commonly relationship between
applied in common law law and society.
systems, especially in
British legal traditions.
8 G.W.F. 1770 Philosophy of Ethical Idealism: Law is Relevant in understanding Criticized by Marx, Idealism/Hegelian
Hegel Right a realization of freedom, the relationship between who saw Hegel's Jurisprudence
and the state is the law, morality, and state focus on the state as
ultimate expression of power. Useful in idealistic and
ethical life (Sittlichkeit). constitutional law where disconnected from
Laws embody moral life law is seen as part of a economic realities.
and ethical relations. broader ethical and
political framework.
9 Karl Marx 1818 Das Kapital, Marxist Theory of Law: Applicable in the analysis Criticized by legal Critical Legal
The Communist Law is a tool of the ruling of class-based legal positivists and Theory/Marxism
Manifesto class used to perpetuate systems and in liberals who argue
economic inequality. It understanding how law Marxism dismisses
reflects the interests of the serves political and individual rights and
bourgeoisie in capitalist economic power freedoms.
societies. structures. Relevant in
critical legal studies and
post-colonial law.
10 John 1806 On Liberty Libertarianism: Influential in Criticized by Liberalism/Utilitarianism
Stuart Mill Advocates for minimal constitutional law, civil communitarian
government interference liberties, and human thinkers like Michael
in personal affairs, with rights. Shaped liberal Sandel, who argue
laws being used to protect democratic values and that Mill's approach
individual freedoms from free speech protection. ignores social bonds.
harm by others.
11 Auguste 1798 Course in Positivism: Advocated for Influenced modern social Criticized by legal Sociological Jurisprudence
Comte Positive a scientific approach to sciences and legal philosophers like
Philosophy law and society, focusing systems that rely on Hegel, who argued
on observable phenomena empirical evidence and against his overly
 and empirical data rather statistical methods to scientific approach to
than abstract theories. understand law and law.
society.
12 Roscoe 1870 Jurisprudence Sociological Applicable in family law, Criticized by Sociological Jurisprudence
Pound Jurisprudence: labor law, and formalists like John
Emphasized the social environmental law, where Austin, who believed
purposes of law, arguing the law is seen as a means law should be studied
that law should evolve to to address social needs in isolation from
meet the needs of society and solve societal social context.
and promote social problems.
welfare.
13 H.L.A. 1907 The Concept of Legal Positivism: Applicable in modern Criticized by natural Analytical
Hart Law Emphasized the legal systems, particularly law theorists like Jurisprudence/Legal
distinction between law as in understanding how Ronald Dworkin, who Positivism
it is (legal rules) and law laws are validated by argued that law must
as it ought to be social practices and how have moral principles.
(morality). Introduced the they function within
concept of the "rule of society. A major influence
recognition." on the development of
legal theory in the 20th
century.
14 Ronald 1931 Taking Rights Rights-Based Theory: Applicable in human Criticized by legal Interpretivism
Dworkin Seriously, Law's Law is not just a set of rights law and cases positivists like H.L.A.
Empire rules but is deeply tied to involving constitutional Hart and Joseph Raz
moral principles. Dworkin interpretation, especially for his opposition to
rejected positivism and in jurisdictions with the separation of law
argued that law should strong commitments to and morality.
reflect moral rights. individual rights and
freedoms.
15 Joseph Raz 1939 The Authority of The Authority of Law: Relevant in understanding Criticized by Ronald Legal Positivism
Law Laws derive authority the relationship between Dworkin and other
from social practices and law, authority, and critics of legal
the reasons people have compliance in legal positivism, who argue
for following them. theory, especially in that law cannot be
Emphasizes the practical modern legal systems and understood in purely
authority of legal systems. jurisprudence on sociological terms.
 legitimacy and the rule of
law.
16 Michel 1926 Discipline and Disciplinary Power: Applicable in the study of Criticized by legal Critical Legal
Foucault Punish, The Argued that law functions criminal law, punishment, formalists who argue Studies/Postmodernism
History of as a form of social control, and surveillance systems. that Foucault's view
Sexuality influencing behavior Influential in critical legal of law as power
through mechanisms of studies and postmodernist reduces it to mere
surveillance, discipline, approaches to law. social control.
and normalization.
17 Alfredo H. 1907 The Concept of Legal Realism: Useful in analyzing Criticized by Realist Jurisprudence
A. Hart Law Advocated for judicial behavior, how formalists who argue
understanding law in the courts interpret laws in that law should be
context of its practical practice, and in understood strictly by
application, emphasizing understanding how legal rules and not by the
that law’s impact depends decisions are influenced context.
on how it is interpreted by social, political, and
and enforced in reality. economic factors.
18 Lon Fuller 1902 The Morality of Procedural Natural Applicable in Criticized by legal Natural Law/Jurisprudence
Law Law: Fuller argued that constitutional law and in positivists who argue Ethics
the law must adhere to understanding the that law’s validity
certain moral principles to principles of law-making, does not depend on
be valid, emphasizing the legal ethics, and legal its moral content.
importance of law’s validity.
internal morality.
19 Edward 1975 Anarchy and the Anarchism and Relevant in studying Criticized by statist Libertarianism/Anarchism
Peter Law Libertarianism: theories of governance, philosophers who
Stringham Advocated for minimal anarchism, and argue that the state is
state interference, alternatives to state law, essential for justice
suggesting that private especially in and order in society.
property rights and contemporary political
voluntary associations philosophy and critiques
could replace government of state power.
law enforcement.
 Relevant Sections of the Indian Contract Act, 1872

1. Formation of Contract
Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Definition of Section Defines a contract as an agreement that is enforceable by Balfour v. Balfour (1919) – In this case, a contract was
Contract 2(h) law. A contract arises from an agreement with mutual defined as an agreement intended to create legal
consent. obligations.
Offer and Section Section 2(a) defines an offer as a proposal made by one party Carlill v. Carbolic Smoke Ball Co. (1893) – The case
Acceptance 2(a), 2(b) to another. Section 2(b) defines acceptance of an offer. highlighted that a unilateral offer can be accepted by
performance of the terms mentioned.
Consideration Section Defines consideration as something of value that is Currie v. Misa (1875) – Established that consideration
2(d) exchanged between the parties to a contract. must be something of value, and it does not necessarily
need to be money.
Capacity to Section 11 Defines who has the capacity to enter into a contract, i.e., Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose (1903) – Held that
Contract minors, persons of unsound mind, and disqualified persons. contracts entered into by minors are void.
Free Consent Section 13, Section 13 defines consent as agreeing to something in a Ranganayakamma v. Alwar Setti (1886) – Held that if
14 manner that is free from coercion, undue influence, etc. consent is given under coercion or undue influence, it is not
Section 14 specifies that consent must be free. considered valid.
Agreement Section 2(e) An agreement is defined as a promise or set of promises Balfour v. Balfour (1919) – Only agreements with legal
forming the consideration for each other. intention are enforceable.

2. Performance of Contract
Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Performance Section 37 A contract must be performed by the parties as per the K.K. Verma v. Union of India (1954) – Held that performance
terms specified. The party failing to perform will be must occur according to the terms, even if unforeseen events
liable for breach. arise.
Time of Section 46, Specifies when and how contracts should be P.K. Ramachandran v. Union of India (1991) – Held that time is
Performance 47, 48 performed: within a specified time or when a an essence of the contract unless agreed otherwise.
reasonable time has passed.
Place of Section 48 Contracts must be performed at the agreed location, Agarwal & Co. v. Laxminarayana (1994) – The Court upheld that
Performance unless stated otherwise. performance must occur at the agreed place or reasonable place as
per the contract.

3. Discharge of Contract
 Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Discharge by Section 39 A contract is discharged when both parties have S.R. Srinivasa v. Rajeshwari (2005) – Held that performance of
Performance performed their obligations. the contract discharges all obligations.
Discharge by Section 62, A contract may be discharged by mutual agreement Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. v. J.G. Engineers (2000) – Held
Agreement 63 of the parties, through novation, rescission, or that mutual agreement between parties can discharge the contract.
alteration.
Discharge by Section 56 Contracts are discharged when performance Satyabrata Ghose v. Mugneeram Bangur & Co. (1954) – Held
Impossibility becomes impossible due to events beyond the that a contract is void if its performance becomes impossible due
control of the parties. to unforeseen events.

4. Breach of Contract and Remedies

Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Breach of Section 73, Section 73 provides that the party suffering from the Kudret Singh v. Rajasthan State Electricity Board (2010) –
Contract 74 breach of contract can claim compensation. Section 74 Held that a breach of contract allows for compensation based
deals with liquidated damages. on actual loss suffered.
Damages Section 73, Compensation can be claimed for loss suffered due to Hadley v. Baxendale (1854) – A foundational case on the
74 breach, including direct and consequential losses. concept of remoteness in damages.
Liquidated damages can also be enforced.
Specific Section 10, Specific performance can be sought for contracts related to Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. N.D. Subramaniam (2001) – Held
Performance 14 immovable property and unique goods where damages are that specific performance of contracts is possible when there is
not adequate. no adequate remedy for damages.
Injunction Section 37, Injunction can be sought to prevent a party from doing Tata Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd. v. M.R. Chawla
38 something they are legally not entitled to do. (1963) – Injunction was granted to prevent the defendant from
breaching a contract.

5. Contracts relating to Sale of Goods and Contracts of Agency

Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Contract of Section 4 to Defines sale of goods, the formation of contracts related Jaswant Singh v. Mahabir Prasad (1951) – Held that the sale of
Sale 54 to sale, and rights of buyers and sellers. goods includes both transfer of ownership and possession.
Contract of Section 182 Deals with the creation of agency relationships, authority American Cyanamid Co. v. Ethicon Ltd. (1975) – Agency
Agency to 238 of agents, and liability of agents and principals. relations and scope of authority were discussed.

6. Contract of Bailment and Pledge

 Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Bailment Section 148 to Defines bailment and deals with the rights and K. K. Verma v. Union of India (1954) – Held that the bailor must provide
171 duties of the bailor and bailee. the bailee with goods in a fit condition.
Pledge Section 172 to A special type of bailment where goods are P. R. Shah v. Union of India (1994) – Held that the pledgee has the right
178 delivered as security for a loan. to sell the pledged goods upon default.

7. Contracts relating to Contracts of Partnership

Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Partnership Section 4 to Defines partnership and covers its rights, duties, K.K. Verma v. Union of India (1954) – Held that partnership arises
67 and liabilities. from an agreement to share profits.
Liabilities of Section 25 to Defines the liability of partners towards each Bhatia v. Dev & Co. (1981) – Held that partners are liable jointly
Partners 30 other and the third party. and severally for the acts of the firm.

8. Contracts of Contracts of Insurance

Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Contract of Section 2(10), Defines insurance contracts, requirements for Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Union of India (2005) – Held that the
Insurance 20 to 40 their validity, and terms of performance. insurance policy must be in writing and clear about the risks.

COMPARATIVE CHART

Aspect Bailment Pledge Indemnity Guarantee Agency

Definition Delivery of goods by Bailment of goods A contract where one A contract to perform the A relationship where one person
one person to another where the bailee party promises to save promise or discharge the (agent) acts on behalf of another
for a specific purpose, (pledgee) has a right the other from loss liability of a third person (principal) and establishes legal
under a contract, to to retain the goods caused by the conduct in case of his default. relations.
return or dispose of the as security for of the promisor or
goods as per payment of a debt. another party.
instructions.
Relevant Sections 148–171 Sections 172–181 Sections 124–125 Sections 126–147 Sections 182–238
Sections
Parties Bailor and Bailee Pledger (Pawnor) Indemnifier and Creditor, Principal Principal and Agent
Involved and Pledgee Indemnified Debtor, and Surety
(Pawnee)
 Purpose Temporary custody or Security for To compensate for To provide assurance or To enable the principal to perform
safe-keeping of goods repayment of a loan losses security acts through the agent
Consideration May or may not Involves a debt or Compensation for the Surety's liability is Agent acts on behalf of the principal
involve consideration obligation loss secondary and arises only and may receive
when the principal debtor commission/remuneration.
defaults.
Ownership Ownership remains Ownership remains Not applicable Not applicable Not applicable
with the bailor with the pledger
Right to Bailee is responsible Pledgee has a right Indemnifier must Surety can claim Agent is entitled to indemnity for
Compensation for negligence to sell the goods if compensate the reimbursement from the acts done in the course of their
resulting in loss. debt is unpaid. indemnified for losses principal debtor if they authority.
as per the contract. are required to pay.
Termination Upon completion of When the debt is Upon fulfillment of Surety's obligation ends Terminated by the act of the parties
the purpose or as per repaid, the pledge indemnity obligations when the principal debtor or by law (death, insanity,
agreement terminates. fulfills the obligation. insolvency).
Key Case Lilley v. Doubleday Lallan Prasad v. Adamson v. Jarvis Amrit Lal Goverdhan Syed Abdul Khader v. Rami
Laws (1881): Defines duty Rahmat Ali (1967): (1827): Right to Lalan v. State Bank of Reddy (1979): Authority of agents.
of care. Coggs v. Rights of the indemnity. Gajanan Travancore (1968): Freeman & Lockyer v. Buckhurst
Bernard (1703): pledgee. Bank of Moreshwar v. Surety’s liability. Bank Park (1964): Doctrine of apparent
Landmark case in Bihar v. Damodar Moreshwar Madan of Bihar v. Damodar authority.
bailment law. Prasad (1969): (1942): Scope of Prasad (1969): Surety’s
Right to retain indemnity. obligation.
goods.

Relevant Sections of the Companies Act, 2013

1. Incorporation and Formation of a Company
Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Types of Section 3 Defines the types of companies such as State of Bihar v. Bihar State Credit & Investment Corporation Ltd.
Companies private, public, and one-person companies. (1993) – Discussed the classification of companies as per Section 3.
Memorandum of Section 4 Defines the fundamental document that Ashbury Railway Carriage and Iron Co. v. Riche (1875) – Discussed
Association outlines the company’s constitution, powers, the importance of the Memorandum of Association in defining the
and objects. scope of the company’s activities.
Articles of Section 5 Defines the internal regulations and rules of Rangaswamy v. K.K. Verma (2000) – Held that the Articles of
Association the company, which govern its operations. Association can override the Memorandum in certain cases, provided
they are in line with the law.
 Incorporation of Section 7 Specifies the process for registering and M/s. Gopal Agarwal v. RoC (2002) – Held that a company can only be
Company incorporating a company with the Registrar of incorporated after the approval of the RoC, as per the provisions of
Companies (RoC). Section 7.

2. Share Capital and Debentures

Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Allotment of Section 42, Governs the allotment of shares, including public V. Suresh v. K. R. Suresh (2015) – Discussed the procedural
Shares 62 and private placements, and conditions for private requirements for allotment of shares and the validity of the
placements. allotment process.
Issue of Shares Section 53 Prohibits the issue of shares at a discount except in Deutsche Bank AG v. UTI Bank Ltd. (2004) – Held that a company
at Discount certain cases as prescribed. cannot issue shares at a discount unless allowed by law or the
company’s articles.
Debentures Section 71 Provides for the issue of debentures, including the R. R. Ramchandran v. Indian Overseas Bank (2007) – Discussed
terms and rights attached to them. the issuance and redemption of debentures as per the provisions of
the Companies Act.

3. Directors and their Powers

Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Appointment of Section 149 Defines the appointment process, qualifications, J.K. Industries Ltd. v. R. R. Kamath (1985) – Held that a company
Directors and minimum number of directors required for must have at least two directors, and the qualifications of directors
different types of companies. must be in accordance with Section 149.
Powers and Duties Section 166 Specifies the duties and powers of directors, M.C. Chockalingam v. Indian Bank Ltd. (1972) – Held that
of Directors including the duty to act in good faith, exercise directors must act in good faith, avoiding conflicts of interest and
care, and avoid conflicts of interest. considering the company’s welfare.
Remuneration of Section 197 Specifies how directors should be remunerated, Hindustan Lever Ltd. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income
Directors including limits and guidelines for payment of Tax (1995) – Held that the remuneration of directors must be
salaries. within limits prescribed by the company’s articles.

4. Meetings and Resolutions

Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Board Section 173 Specifies the process for convening and conducting R.D. Gupta v. S.K. Gupta (2012) – Held that a company’s board
Meetings board meetings, including notice requirements. meetings must be conducted as per Section 173, with proper notice
given to all directors.
 General Section 96, Outlines the process for convening annual general Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. v. H.D.
Meetings 97, 98 meetings (AGM) and extraordinary general meetings Sharma (2000) – Held that the process of conducting AGMs must
(EGM), including special resolutions. comply with legal requirements for a valid meeting.
Special Section 114 Defines special resolutions, which require a 75% Samrat Rice Mills v. Punjab National Bank (1986) – Held that a
Resolutions majority for approval. special resolution requires at least 75% majority, and cannot be
passed without proper voting.

5. Corporate Governance and Compliance

Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Audit and Auditors Section Governs the appointment of auditors and their Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. Coimbatore (1996) – Held that
139, 142 powers to audit company accounts. auditors must act independently and without bias, in compliance
with Section 139.
Corporate Social Section 135 Mandates companies meeting certain financial Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. Union of India (2015) – Held that
Responsibility (CSR) criteria to spend a percentage of profits on social CSR is mandatory for large companies, and they must comply
welfare projects. with the spending provisions under Section 135.
Annual Return Section 92 Requires companies to file an annual return with K.K. Verma v. Union of India (2005) – Held that non-compliance
the RoC providing information on shareholders, with the filing requirements of the annual return is a violation of
directors, and other details. Section 92.

6. Corporate Structure and Financing

Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Shareholders Section 43, Defines the types of shareholders, their rights, and India Cement Ltd. v. State of Tamil Nadu (2010) – Held that
44 responsibilities, including private and public shareholders’ rights and responsibilities must be in line with
companies. the company’s articles and the law.
Protection of Section Provides provisions for minority shareholders, V. Suresh v. K.K. Industries (2002) – Held that minority
Minority 241-246 including their right to approach the NCLT for relief shareholders have the right to approach the NCLT if their
Shareholders in case of oppression or mismanagement. interests are prejudiced.
Financial Section 129 Requires companies to prepare financial statements in Saroj Kumar Banerjee v. M/s. Hindustan Pencils (2005) –
Statements a specified format and file them with the RoC. Held that financial statements must accurately reflect the
financial health of the company and be filed as per the law.

7. Winding Up and Dissolution

Aspect Relevant Explanation Case Laws
Section
Voluntary Section 304 Describes the voluntary winding up process initiated M/s. S.N. Gupta & Sons v. RoC (2010) – Held that companies
Winding Up to 323 by the shareholders, including the powers of the can initiate voluntary winding up with a special resolution,
liquidator. and the liquidator must follow due process.
Winding Up by Section Specifies the circumstances under which a company K.R. Bhavesh v. M/s. R.L. Steels (1992) – Held that the NCLT
Tribunal 271-310 can be wound up by the tribunal, such as in case of has the power to order winding up if the company is unable to
insolvency or unlawful conduct. pay debts.
Liability of Section 341 Deals with the liability of directors for fraudulent McMullan v. Andros Ltd. (1968) – Held that directors can be
Directors in activities during the winding-up process. held personally liable for fraudulent conduct during the
Winding Up winding-up process.