<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1950 (5) TMI 42 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299992</link>
    <description>Article 32 provides a guaranteed fundamental-rights remedy and does not require prior recourse to the High Court under Article 226 where both jurisdictions are available. Freedom of speech and expression encompasses propagation of ideas and circulation of publications. Restrictions are constitutionally permissible only when directed solely at conduct undermining the security of the State or tending to overthrow it. A provision covering broader grounds such as public order or public safety cannot be sustained merely because some applications may fall within the permitted constitutional limits. Where valid and invalid applications cannot be severed, the provision is void in its entirety, resulting in the prohibition order being quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 May 1950 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Jan 2022 17:13:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=666484" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1950 (5) TMI 42 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299992</link>
      <description>Article 32 provides a guaranteed fundamental-rights remedy and does not require prior recourse to the High Court under Article 226 where both jurisdictions are available. Freedom of speech and expression encompasses propagation of ideas and circulation of publications. Restrictions are constitutionally permissible only when directed solely at conduct undermining the security of the State or tending to overthrow it. A provision covering broader grounds such as public order or public safety cannot be sustained merely because some applications may fall within the permitted constitutional limits. Where valid and invalid applications cannot be severed, the provision is void in its entirety, resulting in the prohibition order being quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 May 1950 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299992</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>