LAW Notes.Co

The digital marketing industry thrives on creativity, technology, and innovation, all of which are protected and influenced by intellectual property (IP) laws.
Read more about the IPR and Digital marketing at https://lawnotes.co/intellectual-property-laws-and-their-impact-on-innovation-in-the-digital-marketing-industry

The digital marketing industry thrives on creativity, technology, and innovation, all of which are protected and influenced by intellectual property (IP) laws.

📮 *BNSS*

◾️ *The conditions that can be imposed while granting anticipatory bail (Section 482 (2)*

1. Person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required

2. Person shall not make directly or indirectly any inducement, Threat, or
Promise

👉 *To any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.*

3. The person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court

4. Such other condition as may be imposed under Section 480 (3)

▪️ Exception to the grant of Anticipatory Bail (Section 482 (4)

👉 This Section shall not apply in cases where accusation is made under Section 65 (Punishment for rape in certain cases) and Section 70(2) (Gang Rape on a woman under 18 years of age) of BNSS.

Non-profit and charity laws in India form the backbone of a sector dedicated to addressing societal challenges and advancing public welfare.
Read more about the non profit and charity laws at https://lawnotes.co/comprehensive-guide-to-non-profit-and-charity-laws-in-india

The Latin maxim "Qui Facit Per Alium Facit Per Se" translates to "He who acts through another acts himself." This principle is fundamental to the doctrines of agency and vicarious liability, holding that a person who delegates actions to another is responsible for the outcome of those actions as though they performed them themselves.
Read more about the legal maxim at https://lawnotes.co/qui-facit-per-alium-facit-per-se

The welfare of the people is the supreme law. underscores the fundamental principle that the collective welfare and safety of society take precedence over individual rights or interests when the two come into conflict.
Read more about the Legal maxim at https://lawnotes.co/salus-populi-suprema-lex-esto

Aboriginal Law generally refers to the laws, principles, and doctrines related to the rights, governance, and land claims of Indigenous or aboriginal people.
Read more about the aboriginal law at https://lawnotes.co/aboriginal-law-in-india

The doctrine of Res Judicata is a fundamental principle in both civil and criminal law aimed at preventing the repeated litigation of disputes that have already been conclusively decided by competent courts.
Read more about the Doctrine of res judicata at https://lawnotes.co/doctrine-of-res-judicata

Judicial activism is the proactive role played by the judiciary in safeguarding rights, expanding the scope of the Constitution, and shaping constitutional law.
Read more about the judicial activism at https://lawnotes.co/the-role-of-judicial-activism-in-shaping-constitutional-law

Judicial activism is the proactive role played by the judiciary in safeguarding rights, expanding the scope of the Constitution, and shaping constitutional law.
Read more about the judicial activism at https://lawnotes.co/the-role-of-judicial-activism-in-shaping-constitutional-lawREad

Health laws in India encompass legal frameworks and principles that aim to promote public health, protect patient rights, and regulate the healthcare industry.
Read more about the health laws at https://lawnotes.co/health-laws-in-india-essentials-historical-evolution-and-the-role-of-the-indian-penal-code

Citizenship defines an individual's legal relationship with the state, signifying not only rights but also responsibilities toward the nation. In India, citizenship is governed by Articles 5 to 11 of the Indian Constitution and the Indian Citizenship Act of 1955, both of which delineate how citizenship is acquired, maintained, and can be terminated.
Read more about the Indian citizenship at https://lawnotes.co/citizenship-in-india-articles-5-11-and-the-indian-citizenship-act

Particularly around Section 29A, which regulates the time limits for the arbitral process. Section 29A(4) of the Act, which provides for the role of the “Court” in extending time for arbitral awards, has been the subject of evolving judicial interpretation, reshaping the procedural and jurisdictional contours of arbitration in India.
Read more about the arbitration section 29 A at https://lawnotes.co/the-evolving-interpretation-of-court-in-section-29a4-of-the-arbitration-and-conciliation-act-1996

Using recorded telephonic conversation between wife and her mother as evidence violates the right to privacy, thus not admissible as evidence: Himachal Pradesh HC...
The right to hold a telephone conversation in the privacy of one’s home/office without interference can certainly be claimed as a “Right to Privacy.”...

Himachal Pradesh High Court: In a petition filed by the petitioner (‘husband’) challenging the impugned judgment dated 17-11-2022, whereby the Trial Court rejected an application under Section 65-B1 of the Evidence Act, 1872 (‘IEA’) read with Section 14 of the Family Court Act, 1984 (‘Family Court Act’), Bipin Chandra Negi, J., stated that a telephone conversation was an important facet of an individual’s private life. The right to hold a telephone conversation in the privacy of one’s home/office without interference could certainly be claimed as a “Right to Privacy.” Thus, the Court stated that in the present case, recorded conversation of the respondent (‘wife’) with her mother, which was sought to be placed on record, was illegal, as it amounted to infringement of her right to privacy. Since the aforesaid recording was illegal, therefore, it was not admissible in evidence. The Court after perusal of the application filed under Section 65-B of IEA read with Section 14 of the Family Court Act revealed that by way of the present application, the husband intended to place on record an alleged conversation between the respondent-wife with her mother. The Court stated that a telephone conversation was an important facet of an individual’s private life. The right to hold a telephone conversation in the privacy of one’s home/office without interference could certainly be claimed as a “Right to Privacy.” Telephone tapping/illegal means of collecting evidence in the aforesaid context would therefore infract Article 21 of the Constitution, unless it was permitted under the procedure established by the law. The Court referred to PUCL v. Union of India, (1997) 1 SCC 301 and K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1 and stated that in the present case, recorded conversation of the wife with her mother, which was sought to be placed on record, was illegal, as it amounted to infringement of her right to privacy. Since the aforesaid recording was illegal, therefore, it was not admissible in evidence. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the present petition and directed the parties to appear before the Trial Court on 05-11-2024....

The burden of proof lies on the plaintiff." This maxim is a fundamental principle of justice, requiring that the party initiating a lawsuit or making a claim (the plaintiff or claimant) must provide adequate evidence to substantiate their assertions before the court.
Read more about the legal maxim https://lawnotes.co/actori-incumbit-onus-proband

Abortion is the process of medically terminating a fetus inside a woman’s body. Some groups equate it to "murder," while others view it as a fundamental women’s rights issue, asserting that a woman alone has the right to decide what happens to her body and, therefore, to any potential life within it.
Read more about the abortion laws at https://lawnotes.co/the-evolution-of-abortion-laws-in-india-a-legal-and-social-perspective

Pacta Sunt Servanda is one of the most significant principles in contract law, holding that agreements must be respected and upheld.
Read more about the pacta sunt servanda at https://lawnotes.co/pacta-sunt-servanda-a-detailed-analysis-of-the-legal-maxim

De minimis non curat lex is a Latin phrase that translates to "the law does not concern itself with trifles." It reflects a legal doctrine wherein the judiciary opts not to involve itself in cases of trivial or insignificant matters, especially if they are unlikely to impact substantive rights.
Red more about the De minimis non curat lex at https://lawnotes.co/application-of-de-minimis-non-curat-lex-maxim

The principle of Ex Turpi Causa acts as a defense in legal cases where one party has engaged in illegal, dishonest, or immoral behavior in relation to the claim they seek to pursue.
https://lawnotes.co/application-of-the-ex-turpi-causa-maxim-in-indian-law

Photo from Sneha Latha