The Delhi High Court has asked Delhi Police to submit a full update on all FIRs and investigations related to the 2020 riots. The court noted that despite alternate legal remedies, petitions have remained pending for six years.
Rajasthan High Court rejected a plea seeking an FIR against PM Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah over the CAA, stating, “No prudent man can make such arbitrary, absurd and bogus allegation,” highlighting lack of evidence in the claim.
The Supreme Court directed Maharashtra to form a Special Investigation Team with Hindu and Muslim officers for the 2023 Akola riots probe. The bench said, “A person after donning the police uniform must rise above all kinds of biasness.”
Today, On 1st August, Udaipur Files row reached Delhi High Court, which questioned the Centre’s authority under the Cinematograph Act. “What made you suggest cuts?” the Chief Justice asked, slamming post-certification interference despite CBFC’s expert scrutiny and legal process.
Petitions challenge government’s approval for release of movie based on Kanhaiya Lal’s murder.
CBFC re-certification request by producers also under consideration.
Supreme Court hears plea on ‘Udaipur Files’ film release, weighing free speech against accused’s fair trial rights. Justices question CBFC cuts, Centre’s role, and prejudice to ongoing trial.
Today, On 24th July, Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind has moved the Supreme Court challenging the Centre’s approval of the film, alleging it promotes communal hatred and portrays Indian Muslims to terrorists.
Hearing in the Shahi Jama Masjid–Harihar Mandir dispute has been postponed to August 5 due to a lawyers’ strike. The case involves claims of a mosque built over a temple, sparking legal and communal tensions.
The Supreme Court will hear a plea on Tuesday filed by an accused in the murder of tailor Kanhaiya Lal, who was killed by two Muslim men, challenging the release of the film ‘Udaipur Files’.
Supreme Court says it didn’t pass any written order on plea against Udaipur Files, only refused urgent listing. Clarification comes after confusion over court’s oral remark: “Let the film be released.”
