The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu Police to refuse permission for protests targeting judges and to end any permitted assembly that turns into a personal attack on a sitting judge, while declining a blanket ban on public discussion of court rulings.
Notice, not a finding: the Madras High Court has asked the Union government and Cockroach Janata Party co-convenor Saurav Das to respond to a PIL that questions Saurav Das’s nationality and seeks the blocking of his social media accounts. Chennai: A public interest litigation questioning Saurav Das’s nationality and antecedents has drawn notice from the […]
The Madras High Court has dismissed as withdrawn a lawyer’s writ petition challenging the Tamil Nadu government’s decision to build a new Secretariat and Legislative Assembly complex at Pattinampakkam in Chennai, after the Bench asked how public money was being wasted and said it was for the government to decide where to build. Chennai: The […]
The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu Government to constitute a Joint Working Group and place on record, within four weeks, a draft SOP governing the use of captive elephants in temple festivals, while dismissing impleadment pleas by People for Cattle in India and Suparna Ganguly that sought to halt the transfer of five elephants from Assam.
The Madras High Court has said it will hear a plea seeking a CBI probe into a POCSO case involving industrialist R Veeramani, known as Gem Granites Veeramani, who was arrested last month over the alleged sexual assault of minor girls. The senior counsel flagged that objectionable videos connected to the case were being broadcast by some media outlets in violation of the POCSO Act. Tamil Nadu has constituted a Special Investigation Team.
The Madras High Court has dismissed a writ petition by an AIADMK Whip challenging the Tamil Nadu Assembly’s June resolution on the Mekedatu Dam, specifically the portion urging the Centre to constitute a fresh inter-State water tribunal, on the ground that it was incorporated without being separately moved and voted. The Court held that Article 212 of the Constitution bars courts from questioning the validity of legislative proceedings on the ground of an alleged procedural irregularity, and that no exception was made out.
The Madras High Court ruled that advocates have no vested or fundamental right to demand out-of-turn listing of pending cases. Dismissing a lawyer’s plea, the Court held that only genuinely urgent matters may receive priority through established judicial procedures and exceptional listing protocols.
