India

Primary tabs

The petitioner, Sandesh Bansal, is a health activist and member of Jan Adhikaar Manch, a nongovernmental organization (NGO) working to raise concern over the high maternal mortality rate (MMR) in Madhya Pradesh as a part of their “Save our Mothers” campaign. The case was also part of Human Rights Law Network’s (HRLN’s) national litigation strategy to address India’s high maternal mortality and morbidity rates. Petitioner alleged that the state failed to provide basic and adequate maternal healthcare.

This case concerns the constitutionality of Section 3(d) of the 2005 Amendment (“Amendment”) to India’s Patent Law, which was added to comply with Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and World Trade Organization’s (WTO) minimum standards for protecting intellectual property.  Section 3(d) requires that inventions based on a known substance be patentable only if they show the “enhanced efficacy” of the known substance.  Novartis, a large pharmaceutical company, submitted a patent application for its leukemia medication, Gleevec.  Novartis’ application was denied on

* Following discussions within ESCR-Net’s membership on climate and environmental justice and human rights in relation to the COVID-19 crisis, multiple members co-authored short articles in this context, including the following piece which was originally published on...

Statement: "India’s COVID-19 Lockdown: Human Rights Assessment and Compilation of State Relief Measures"

New Delhi, 5 May 2020

>> https://www.hlrn.org.in/documents/...

Developed by an ESCR-Net Member

In August 2008, the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare’s NACO developed an “Office Memorandum” in response to a public interest litigation (PIL), in which the Supreme Court reviewed the steps taken by NACO to combat HIV/AIDS and the services being provided to patients. The Supreme Court had issued directives, including those aimed at improving the sufficiency of centres distributing second line anti-retroviral therapy (ART).

This case concerns the leasing of tribal lands for mining and industrial purposes.  The State of Andhra Pradesh granted leases to several non-tribal persons to mine tribal lands.  Samatha, a group representing the rights of affected tribal persons, filed a petition in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh arguing that the granting of leases to tribal lands to non-tribal persons for mining purposes violated the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Areas Land Transfer Regulation (1959) and the Forest Conservation Act (1980).  The petition was rejected by the High Court and Samatha subsequently appealed to the

ESCR-Net members, POSCO Pratirodh Sangram Samiti (PPSS) are once again forced to resist the transfer of their land by the government of Odisha, India, to a steel company, despite having previously...

This case concerns the Ratlam municipality’s obligations to its people under Section 123 M. P. Municipalities Act of 1961. These obligations include the provision of sanitary facilities and the prevention of street contamination from a nearby alcohol plant. The residents of the Ratlam municipality, frustrated at the lack of sanitary facilities and the contamination in the streets, brought suit against the municipality under Section 133 of the Criminal Procedure Code for public nuisance.

Indian Supreme Court upholds gender equality in inheritance law

Gurulingappa Savadi was the head of a Hindu joint (intergenerational) family who died in 2001. In 2002, his grandson brought a suit to partition the family property, alleging that only Mr. Savadi’s widow and two sons were co-owners of the property upon Mr. Savadi’s death. The suit asserted that Mr. Savadi’s two married daughters were not entitled to any share of the property, since they were born prior to the Hindu Succession Act (codified customary/personal law), and therefore could not be treated as coparceners (persons who share jointly with others in an inheritance).