Anuradha Bhasin v. Union of India (2020) Facts of the case The case primarily dealt with the suspension of the internet in the State of Jammu and Kashmir post revocation of Article 370 of the Constitution of India, however, one of the issues in the case was regarding the excessive imposition of Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which empowers a magistrate to impose restrictions on movement and speech in areas where trouble could erupt. Judgment of the court The Supreme Court of India, in this case, held that Section 144 CrPC cannot be used as a tool to prevent legitimate expression of opinion. The court further held that Section 144 CrPC is not only remedial but also preventive, and shall be exercised only in cases where there is danger or apprehension of danger. The jurisdiction of Section 144 of CrPC shall not be used to suppress the legitimate expression of opinion or grievance or exercise of any democratic rights. The Apex Court also directed the respondent-State or competent authorities to publish all orders in force and any future orders under Section 144 of CrPC and for suspension of telecom services, including internet, to enable the affected persons to challenge it before the High Court or appropriate forum. The Court further held that an order passed under Section 144 of CrPC should state the material facts to enable judicial review of the same. The power should be exercised in a bona fide and reasonable manner, and the same should be passed by relying on the material facts, indicative of application of mind which will enable judicial scrutiny.
Find the maximum people that a company can recruit, if the recruit function is given by p(x) = 41 − 24x − 18x2
If 3.5 are the Eigen values of a square matrix A of order 2. then the Eigen values of the matrix A3 will be:
Maximum angle of diffraction in a plane transmission diffraction grating is:
