Don't Go Beyond Argument; CJI Schools Mehta, Slam Govt.

Don't Go Beyond Argument; CJI Schools Mehta, Slam Govt. #lawchakra #supremecourtofindia #analysis
Follow us on Twitter:- / lawchakra
Follow us on Whatsapp : whatsapp.com/channel/0029VaP5...
Visit Our Website:- lawchakra.in/
Patna High Court Karnataka High Court Live Stream.
#Patnahighcourt #SupremeCourtofIndia #Supremecourt
Courtesy :- Supreme Court of India
Books on Constitution:- amzn.to/3rqFpbh
Tools Used for editing:- amzn.to/3EelR1r
For business Enquiries:- [e-mail]
#SupremeCourt#Mussorrie #advocate #lawyer #legal #livehighcourt #indianlaw #law #live #court #argument #criminaljustice #guiltyminds #learnadvocacy #courtlive #justicelive #lawmotivation #beajudge #ias #judge #law #legal #patnahighcourt #justiceashutoshkumar #judiciary #motivation #learnlaw #IAS #supremecourtofindia #IPS #2022 #Patnahighcourtstream #orissahighcourt #SupremeCourt #Orissahighcourt#GujaratHighCourt
#Law #Chakra#JusticeAshutoshkumar
*This Video is strictly for Legal Awareness & Education Purpose only.📚
🙏 Follow us on twitter, Instagram and facebook.
@Lawchakra
👉Twitter
/ lawchakra
👉 Instagram.
/ lawchakra
📑*Fair Use Policy -*
Copyright Disclaimer under Section 107 of the copyright act 1976, allowance is made for fair use for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational or personal use tips the balance in favour of fair use.

[@lajpaulsinghkinra5972]

In logo ne apni manmarzee hi kaarni hoti hai..phir vakil yaa daleel bhi kyun karwaai jaati hain...BJP ...RSS....Modi...Yogi ka kahin naam aayega to mukddma uljha kar..in ke khilaaf hi faisla dena hota hai..

[@uksatapathy1]

height of shamelessness and what.. no word, should analyse in dark infront of god and accept the curse of sef

[@laiquddinshaikh8645]

Devils sg

[@raymondbongcher3510]

Also Tripura should be under detection for illegal immigration, why only Assam?

[@shuvranilroy2479]

People without knowledge of law or the arguments being discussed commenting bullsh*t here. No wonder these are uneducated bhakts. Try naa respect the Position. It's Chief Justice of India not your average BJP uncle.

[@just4humanity]

Ohhh the fact that Judges of Supreme Court don't want transparent system in appointment of Judges and that they can't hear the cases of the common man out of turn but have no hesitation to have a special hearing primarily to grant bail, have their kith and kin appointment .....all this does not need one to know the legal process . Common Sense. They need to know that they may protected as MY LORD but people are loosing faith in them too.

[@girijaramarao4252]

BJP uncle is practical and down to earth bhakt ...not pSickular armchair elitist who lectures in a university and can not even fix a puncture of a tyre.

[@kastor002]

He was in Bengal when women were being whopped in the streets....where did his highness and his respect for law go then?!? Arrest the supreme kotha judges they are a part of the Soros funded legal stranglehold on sovereign nations

[@shuvranilroy2479]

@@girijaramarao4252 Your comment proves my point anyway

[@indrajitgupta3280]

@@girijaramarao4252 Fixing a puncture of a tyre is not a skill that can be used to decide a legal issue. There are several other areas where it does not help. For instance, open heart surgery. Clever, seemingly down-to-earth homespun wisdom rarely lights up a situation.

[@indrajitgupta3280]

It is difficult to understand the arguments about 'undivided India'. This was defined long before the Constitution of India was accepted and promulgated; NOTHING within the Constitution has conflicted with that, or is intended to conflict with that. In terms of the India Independence Act, India, implying, presumably, unless there is some over-smart individual who wishes to take a different line, all of India, that is, the territories subsumed in the Crown Colony of India, is clearly defined, and is separate from the princely states, that were territories ruled by their own sovereign rulers - sovereign rulers - and were subjected to the British Crown (just to be sure to avoid quibbling, the royal administration of the United Kingdom) by treaty arrangements. In legalese, the British Crown was in a suzerain position over these states. The British Crown withdrew from its treaty positions, universally, in the cases of the Indian princely states, and technically, each of them, approximately 531 + 17, were sovereign territories under sovereign rulers. UNTIL the Constitution of India came into force on the 26th of January, 1950, there was a period of transition, during which period, all the princely states that acceded to India, or were compelled by military force to accede to India, 531 of them, were in transit from sovereign territories to integral parts of India, wherever either before or after the occupation of the state, the ruler acceded to the Dominion of India, as the Crown Colony of India less the territories defined as the Dominion of Pakistan by British legislation came to be. Only Junagadh never formally acceded; Hyderabad acceded after being occupied by Indian troops; Goa (in 1961) was occupied by military action, and Sikkim was annexed, presumably based on a referendum that was run after the dissolution of the former independent government and imposition of central Indian rule. How does this affect the arguments? That is where the arguments were made; what constituted undivided India? Was it the Crown Colony? Was it the succeeding Dominion of India? Was it the post-Constitution Republic of India, comprising of the former Dominion and additional acceding princely states? Since India here is defined as 'undivided India', it cannot be a reference to the post-1947 British Act. It can be a reference to the pre-1947 territories of British India. It cannot be the territories of the princely states, as they were sovereign territories and were not part of India in legal terms, and since, in any case, perhaps 17 out of 548 acceded to Pakistan. Here, the current Government of India administration (the position may change if there is in future a different political section running the Government of India), wishes to restrict the territory whose residents, present or previous, are entitled to Indian citizenship. Were residents of Pakistan, west Pakistan and east Pakistan, both, entitled to citizenship of post-partition India? How long did this entitlement continue? Were any other categories entitled to citizenship due to right of residence in a specific territory, other than undivided India? Not easy questions, and very major difficulties arise out of the reconciliation of different opinions on the subject.

[@nagarajukr760]

The PERCEPTION of common people is that the observation of CJI and some supreme court judges shows that they don't like the BJP Governments....

[@victorimmanuel6988]

If aryans are accepted in India, why not others

[@rajaalmeida4914]

Get all the data records, don't give your answers. Lol.😅