Joseph Shine v. Union of India
E522751
Joseph Shine v. Union of India is a landmark 2018 Supreme Court of India judgment that decriminalized adultery by striking down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code as unconstitutional and discriminatory.
All labels observed (1)
| Label | Occurrences |
|---|---|
| Joseph Shine v. Union of India canonical | 1 |
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T5486365 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Joseph Shine v. Union of India Context triple: [Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, notableWork, Joseph Shine v. Union of India]
-
A.
Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India
Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India is a landmark Supreme Court of India case that examined environmental, displacement, and development issues surrounding large dam construction on the Narmada River.
-
B.
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala is a landmark 1973 Supreme Court of India judgment that established the basic structure doctrine, limiting Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution.
-
C.
INS v. Chadha
INS v. Chadha is a landmark 1983 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down the legislative veto as unconstitutional, significantly reshaping the balance of power between Congress and the executive branch.
-
D.
ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla decision
The ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla decision was a controversial 1976 Indian Supreme Court ruling during the Emergency that held citizens had no locus to challenge unlawful detentions when fundamental rights were suspended, later widely criticized and effectively overruled.
-
E.
Shaw v. Hunt
Shaw v. Hunt is a 1996 U.S. Supreme Court case that further developed the Court’s racial gerrymandering jurisprudence by applying and extending the principles first articulated in Shaw v. Reno.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: Joseph Shine v. Union of India Target entity description: Joseph Shine v. Union of India is a landmark 2018 Supreme Court of India judgment that decriminalized adultery by striking down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code as unconstitutional and discriminatory.
-
A.
Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India
Narmada Bachao Andolan v. Union of India is a landmark Supreme Court of India case that examined environmental, displacement, and development issues surrounding large dam construction on the Narmada River.
-
B.
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala
Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala is a landmark 1973 Supreme Court of India judgment that established the basic structure doctrine, limiting Parliament’s power to amend the Constitution.
-
C.
INS v. Chadha
INS v. Chadha is a landmark 1983 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down the legislative veto as unconstitutional, significantly reshaping the balance of power between Congress and the executive branch.
-
D.
ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla decision
The ADM Jabalpur v. Shivkant Shukla decision was a controversial 1976 Indian Supreme Court ruling during the Emergency that held citizens had no locus to challenge unlawful detentions when fundamental rights were suspended, later widely criticized and effectively overruled.
-
E.
Shaw v. Hunt
Shaw v. Hunt is a 1996 U.S. Supreme Court case that further developed the Court’s racial gerrymandering jurisprudence by applying and extending the principles first articulated in Shaw v. Reno.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (49)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
Supreme Court of India judgment
ⓘ
constitutional law case ⓘ landmark judgment ⓘ |
| benchType | Constitution Bench ⓘ |
| chiefJusticeOnBench | Dipak Misra ⓘ |
| citation | (2019) 3 SCC 39 ⓘ |
| constitutionalProvisionInterpreted |
Article 14 of the Constitution of India
ⓘ
Article 15 of the Constitution of India ⓘ Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India ⓘ
linked to:
Article 19 of the Constitution of India
Article 21 of the Constitution of India ⓘ |
| country | India ⓘ |
| court | Supreme Court of India ⓘ |
| dateOfJudgment | 2018-09-27 ⓘ |
| effect |
decriminalized adultery in India
ⓘ
read down Section 198(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ⓘ struck down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code ⓘ |
| held |
Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code is manifestly arbitrary
ⓘ
Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code is unconstitutional ⓘ Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code violates Article 14 ⓘ Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code violates Article 15 ⓘ Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code violates Article 21 ⓘ adultery is a civil wrong and not a criminal offence ⓘ |
| judge |
A. M. Khanwilkar
ⓘ
D. Y. Chandrachud ⓘ
linked to:
Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud
Dipak Misra ⓘ Indu Malhotra ⓘ R. F. Nariman ⓘ |
| jurisdiction | India ⓘ |
| legalProvisionChallenged |
Section 198(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
ⓘ
Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code ⓘ |
| numberOfJudges | 5 ⓘ |
| overruledPrecedent |
Sowmithri Vishnu v. Union of India
ⓘ
V. Revathi v. Union of India ⓘ
linked to:
Sowmithri Vishnu v. Union of India
|
| petitioner | Joseph Shine ⓘ |
| reasoning |
Section 497 treated women as property of their husbands
ⓘ
Section 497 was based on gender stereotypes ⓘ autonomy and dignity of women must be protected ⓘ criminal law cannot enforce private moral obligations between consenting adults ⓘ |
| relatedAreaOfLaw |
constitutional rights
ⓘ
criminal law ⓘ family law ⓘ |
| respondent | Union of India ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
adultery law
ⓘ
criminalization of adultery ⓘ gender equality ⓘ personal liberty ⓘ right to privacy ⓘ |
| typeOfPetition | public interest litigation ⓘ |
| yearOfDecision | 2018 ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: Joseph Shine v. Union of India Description of subject: Joseph Shine v. Union of India is a landmark 2018 Supreme Court of India judgment that decriminalized adultery by striking down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code as unconstitutional and discriminatory.
Referenced by (1)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.