The Supreme Court set aside the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s order directing a CBI probe into the Ambience Island project in Gurugram. The ruling brings major relief to residents and stakeholders, while clarifying that other connected cases before the High Court will continue independently.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court ordered the Haryana government to take strict action against nearly 4,000 illegal constructions in DLF City, Gurugram, within two months. The court slammed authorities for allowing unplanned development, warning that it could collapse Gurugram’s infrastructure, water supply, transport, and air quality. It also directed civil courts to close unauthorized cases blocking action. The ruling came in response to petitions highlighting violations of zoning laws and building codes, exposing a land mafia nexus.
A heated argument between a government lawyer and an advocate at a Gurugram court led to tensions between the Bar Association and the presiding judge. The judge criticized the behavior of the advocate and Bar members, prompting the Bar to file a complaint with the Punjab and Haryana High Court and boycott the court for two weeks. The dispute escalated during witness testimony, resulting in offensive language and a temporary suspension of the hearing. The Gurgaon District Bar Association passed a resolution condemning the incident and the JMIC’s reluctance to resolve the matter.
In the Atul Subhash suicide case, Karnataka police have arrested three individuals, including Nikita Singhania, Nisha Singhania, and Anurag Singhania, who have been remanded to judicial custody. Atul Subhash alleged harassment in a suicide note. His family sought anticipatory bail while police continue their investigation and apprehension of additional suspects.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court denied bail to a quack doctor accused of causing a death due to improper treatment. The court emphasized that unregistered medical practitioners are a serious threat to public health in India. The accused doctor allegedly administered incorrect treatment which led to the death of a patient, and the court stressed the serious risk and impact of unregistered medical practitioners on public health. The accused doctor’s counsel argued lack of intent and knowledge of causing death, along with absence of necessary professional qualifications. The court highlighted the need for scientific and medical evidence in determining the cause of death before the trial.