This PIL sought a direction to make self-defence training part of physical education in all schools. The court held the matter to be one of policy and declined to issue the direction, dismissing the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
skn 1 44.19-pil.doc
PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION NO. 44 OF 2019
Association for aiding Justice. … Petitioner V/s.
State of Maharashtra and others. … Respondents
Mr.Dipesh Siroya for the petitioner. Mr.P.P.Kakade, GP with Mr.M.M.Pable, AGP for the State.
CORAM : PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, C.J. AND N.M.JAMDAR, J.
DATE : 8 August 2019.
P.C. :
Pleading pertaining to data shows increase in crime against children. Prayer made in the petition is to direct the respondents to ensure self defence training as a part of physical education in all the schools.
N.M.JAMDAR, J. CHIEF JUSTICE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can direct the government to include self-defence training in physical education.
Whether the prayer for a direction to introduce self-defence training in all schools is maintainable.
Association for aiding Justice
State of Maharashtra
Pradeep Nandrajog
N.M. Jamdar
As recorded by the court registry
Litigation brought on behalf of the public interest rather than a personal grievance, relaxing the usual rule of locus standi.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
