Crucial Constitutional Law Judgment – Supreme Court 2020

Crucial Constitutional law Judgment- Supreme Court 2020

  • RBI ban on Cryptocurrency set aside on grounds of proportionality

The Court recognized that the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has the power to regulate the monetary and credit system, which also extends to the regulation of virtual or cryptocurrencies. The Court, on the other hand, held that the RBI circular of April 2018, which entirely banned regulated financial institutions from providing services to crypto businesses, is a disproportionate measure and not a reasonable restriction under Article 19(2).

Case name: Internet and Mobile Association of India v. Reserve Bank of India 

Citation: 2020 SCC OnLine SC 275

Coram: Rohinton Fali Nariman, Aniruddha Bose and V Ramasubramanian JJ.

  • Suspension on internet should not be for indefinite period and must follow Proportionality Test

The Supreme Court noted that freedom of speech and expression and freedom to carry on any trade, business or occupation over the medium of internet enjoys Constitutional protection under Article 19(1)(g). Suspension of the internet should only be for a reasonable duration and periodic review should be done. Prohibitory orders under Section 144 CrPC cannot be imposed to suppress legitimate expression of opinion or grievance or exercise of any democratic rights.

Case name: Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India 

Citation: 2020 3 SCC 637

Coram: NV Ramana, Surya Kant, and BR Gavai JJ.

  • State is not bound to make reservations for SCs/STs in matters of promotion

The Court reiterated the law set down in M Nagaraj v. Union of India and held that the State is not bound to make reservations for SCs/STs in matters of promotion. However, if they wish to do so, they have to collect quantifiable data showing backwardness of the class and inadequacy of representation of that class in public employment, keeping in mind maintenance of efficiency, as indicated by Article 335 of the Constitution of India.

Case name: Pravakar Mallick & Anr. v. State of Orissa 

Citation: 2020 SCC OnLine SC 375

Coram: Mohan M Shantanagoudar and R Subhash Reddy JJ.

[ Crucial Constitutional law Judgment- Supreme Court 2020 ]

  • Rights confirmed under Article 30 is not absolute, could be exercised according to regulation of the State

The Court that there is no fundamental right violation in making NEET applicable to private minority unaided professional institutes for admission into MBBS, MD, BDS and MDS courses. While observing this Court again stated that the principles governing minority educational institutions under Article 30 of the Constitution, that the right conferred on religious and linguistic minorities to administer educational institutions of their choice is not an “absolute right” and is not free of “regulation” from the State. Article 30 doesn’t prevent the State from imposing reasonable regulations to make administration of minority institutions transparent, it added.

Case name: Christian Medical College Vellore Association v. Union of India & Ors. 


Citation: 2020 SCC OnLine SC 423

Coram: Arun Mishra, Vineet Saran and MR Shah JJ.

  • Special Committee to review 4G connectivity in Jammu & Kashmir

The Apex Court directed the constitution of a Special Committee comprising Secretaries of the Union Ministry of Home Affairs and the Chief Secretary of Jammu & Kashmir to inspect arguments rose in pleas seeking restoration of 4G internet in the region.

Case name: Foundation for Media Professionals v. UT of J&K 

Citation: 2020 SCC OnLine SC 453

Coram: NV Ramana, R Subhash Reddy and BR Gavai JJ.

[ Crucial Constitutional law Judgment- Supreme Court 2020 ]

  • Shaheen Bagh Protests: The Public Places can’t be Occupied Indefinitely

The bench comprising Justices S K Kaul, Aniruddha Bose and Krishna Murari observed that, “Dissent and democracy go hand in hand but protests must be carried out in designated area”.

While delivering a verdict on the protests that took place at Delhi’s Shaheen Bagh this year, the Supreme Court has held that public places can’t be occupied indefinitely. The court further noted that “social media channels are often fraught with danger” and they lead to highly polarising environments.

“This is what was witnessed in Shaheen Bagh. What started out as a protest caused inconvenience to commuters,” held the Apex Court.

Case name: Amit Sahni v. Commissioner of Police

Citation: 2020 SCC OnLine SC 808

Coram: SK Kaul, Aniruddha Bose and Krishna Murari, JJ

  • Levy of GST on Lottery, Betting and Gambling, Upholds SC

In a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court upheld the levy of Goods and Services Tax (GST) on lotteries, betting and gambling. The Court ruled this while dismissing a writ petition filed by Skill Loto Solutions Pvt Ltd challenging the levy of GST on lotteries as violative of Articles 14, 19(1) (g), 301 and 304 of the Constitution of India.

Case Name: Skill Loto Solutions Pvt Ltd v Union of India

Citation: WP(c) No.961 of 2018

Coram: Justices Ashok Bhushan, R Subhash Reddy and MR Shah

Crucial Constitutional law Judgment- Supreme Court 2020

Also Read: Landmark Supreme Court Judgment, 2020 – Civil Laws

Also Read: Landmark Supreme Court 2020 Judgment On Bail

Also Read: The Constitution Bench Judgments/Orders Of The Supreme Court, 2020

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *