Today(on 23rd April), the Bombay High Court ruled that public sector banks do not have the authority to issue Look Out Circulars (LOCs) against citizens and foreigners based on the Central government’s office memoranda. The decision stemmed from petitions challenging LOCs for debtors wanting to travel abroad. The court quashed all LOCs issued at the banks’ request.
Today(on 19th April), the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal on Lok Sabha nomination paper rejection, cautioning against court interference to avoid potential chaos. The petitioner was advised to pursue legal remedies instead. The case highlighted concerns over arbitrary rejection of nomination papers, advocating for a fairer electoral process. The Banka constituency will vote on April 26th. Follow for more legal updates.
Today,19th April,The Supreme Court sought responses on labeling the CAA rules as “Anti-Constitutional,” addressing concerns of fairness and constitutionality. Petitioner Hiren Gohain argues that the rules lead to demographic shifts and infringe upon fundamental rights. The plea aims to protect the rights of the indigenous population in Assam, emphasizing the urgent issue of illegal migration.
Today(on 15th April), The Delhi High Court emphasized the right to be identified by one’s name and as the child of their parents, stating that legitimate requests for name corrections should be granted. It ordered the CBSE to issue new marksheets for Classes 10 and 12 with the correct name of the petitioner’s father, recognizing the importance of accurate identity.
The Kerala High Court intervened in the violence on Bigg Boss, directing action against it and sending notices to actor Mohanlal, Disney, and Asianet. This signals a potential shift in regulatory oversight for such shows. The Court’s directive based on a petition highlighting instances of physical assault, which are in violation of government advisories. The next hearing for the matter scheduled for May 20.
Today 4th April, A recent plea in the Supreme Court emphasizes that the Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) aims to protect persecuted non-Muslim minorities from Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh. The plea argues that the CAA does not violate any fundamental rights and requests the rejection of a petition challenging its constitutionality. The Supreme Court is set to hear petitions against the CAA on April 9.
The Supreme Court’s recent invalidation of the electoral bonds scheme highlights the balance between privacy and transparency in political funding. The decision emphasizes the crucial role of judicial review in safeguarding fundamental rights and underscores the significance of public access to information about political contributions. This ruling signifies the evolving nature of law and democracy.
The Supreme Court recently ruled in favor of Shiba Shankar Das, overturning a bail condition restricting his political activities. Das, a former mayor and BJP leader, challenged the constraint imposed by the Orissa High Court, emphasizing fundamental rights. NEW DELHI: Recently, The Supreme Court has made a significant ruling affecting the rights of individuals under […]
On Friday (15th March): The Delhi High Court directed Tihar jail to allow Aaftab Poonawalla, accused in the Shraddha Walkar murder case, to have eight hours of daytime release in adherence to jail regulations. This change aims to balance security concerns with humane treatment while Poonawalla awaits trial for the murder of his former partner.
On Wednesday(13th March), The Kerala government, led by Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, is set to challenge the implementation of the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in the Supreme Court following the central government’s recent notification of CAA rules. This reaffirms the state’s persistent opposition to the CAA, rooted in the belief that it infringes upon the Indian Constitution’s fundamental principles.
![[Nithari Killings Case]| Supreme Court to Hear Plea Against Acquittal](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/image-43-1.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
