In Hema Vijay Menon v. State of Maharashtra, Hema Vijay Menon, a government lecturer, lost her only son and later chose to become a mother again through surrogacy after unsuccessful IVF attempts. When she applied for maternity leave under the Maharashtra Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1981, the government denied the request, stating that the rules did not provide for maternity leave in cases of surrogacy.
In this case, the petitioner, convicted under the Dowry Prohibition Act, argued that the testimony of witnesses who were all related to the complainant was insufficient to prove his participation in a demand for dowry. The Court held that such testimony is sufficient to sustain a conviction if credible, and that once evidence of a dowry demand is presented, the burden shifts to the accused to prove that they did not participate, such as by establishing an alibi.
After a police raid on a brothel, four pimps were arrested and twenty-four women and girls were taken into custody. The magistrate ordered medical examinations to determine, among other things, the women’s ages. He then ordered the release of those aged 18 and over, and a few days later ordered the release of the minor girls, stating that they had expressed a desire to be released. The Court held that this violated the Juvenile Justice Act, as only a Child Welfare Board is authorized to decide on the release and rehabilitation of minors.
