Sign up now
to enroll in courses, follow best educators, interact with the community and track your progress.
Chapter-3 Analogy part-6 ( in Hindi)
397 plays

Chapterwise course on verbal reasoning This course will help you in every competitive exams Here we'll cover all about verbal reasoning.

Priyanka Aggarwal is teaching live on Unacademy Plus

Priyanka Aggarwal
Unacademy plus subscription discount referral code:- 'PRIYANKA' B.Sc. , M Sc. (Delhi university) university topper, gold 🏅 medalist Author

Unacademy user
2542 words, verbatim!! with some spelling corrections ;) hey guys I am Jatin Varma this is first editorial analysis for 1st of September 2017 it's a kind of debate basically on the issue is it high time to review Section 377 today's debate is divided into three parts arguments in favour of the statement arguments against the statement and then finally balancing both the sides argument in arguments in favour and arguments against this statement so what is the background what is the immediate context immediate context is that in the recently Paas Supreme Court judgement on right to privacy declaring right to privacy at the fundamental rights 3 or 4 paragraphs for dedicated to this issue of section 377 so Section 377 by the way is a Dead Letter although but it still needs a burial by way of Legislative enactment on amendment to section section 377 of IPC by the Parliament of India so that is why we are going to discuss the background for staples in 2009 delhihighcourt came up with the judgement a progressive judgement there by a testing the standoff Naz Foundation soon as Foundation a positioning for the rights of days h********** challenge the constitutional validity of section 377 before the Delhi High Court and receive the favourable verdict when the court held that Delhi High Court held that a sense of section 377 goes against the fundamental rights of citizens so which all fundamental rights was cited article 21 14 and 15 article 21 inches 21 inches write 2 degree fight 11 and 14th right to equality and 15 a provision on state discriminating against any Citizen on the ground of religion railscast 6 so here's the word sex is relevant because we are talking about h************ and how article 21 the Delhi High Court held that in order for a person to enjoy a dignified living his or her a natural sexual orientation should be allowed to a lot for him to enjoy his or her life Article 14 Right to Equality on the basis of just we can say sexual orientation two categories were created h********* then heterosexuals which goes against the letter and spirit of article 14 that is right to equality so that is why it was held to be Ultra was the Constitution by Delhi High Court but they are ckc or the validity of this judgement was short lived because in the sense that in 2013 under the Kaushal judgement popularly called as Kaushal judgement Suresh Kumar Kaushal vs Naz foundation 2013 Supreme Court set aside the Delhi High Court judgement on this issue delhihighcourt underlined other issues as well as per the rules that provisions of section 377 would continue to govern non-consensual panel non vaginal sex and then I'll not vaginal sex involving - so I am going to focus on this issue of involving - rest of the issues because of the fact that we are talking in public domain you have to search on your own so as to understand this piece of writing in a better way now coming to this minor issue in the today's DNA limit reached
al bahot acha padati ho mam😀👌
analogy AAP bahut Sahi se teach Kara Rahi hai mam
Priyanka Aggarwal
10 months ago
Thankyou 😊 Naeem ji