![[Swati Maliwal Assault Case] Bibhav Kumar Appeals to SC Against Delhi HC's Bail Order](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/image-37-3.png?resize=447%2C360&ssl=1)
Today, On 25th July, Bibhav Kumar appealed the Supreme Court to challenge the High Court’s decision denying him bail in the alleged assault case against Swati Maliwal. The case has political implications due to Kumar’s association with Arvind Kejriwal and the Aam Aadmi Party. The legal and political implications of the bail denial raise questions about the intersection of politics and justice in India.
New criminal laws effective since July 1 challenge Delhi’s veteran lawyers to relearn legal sections they have known for decades, under the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Section numbers have changed, requiring significant effort and adaptation. Concerns arise regarding increased police power and limitations on freedom of expression. The impact on the judicial system and legal practice in India is unfolding.
The exemption of marital rape under Indian law has sparked scrutiny, as sexual intercourse with a wife over 18 is not classified as rape. This has raised concerns about equality, discrimination, bodily autonomy, and dignity. Despite a split verdict in the Delhi High Court, critics argue that the exemption undermines women’s fundamental rights, prompting calls for reform.
The Orissa High Court commuted the death sentence of Sheikh Asif Ali, convicted for the rape and murder of a six-year-old girl, to life imprisonment. The court noted that Asif Ali has been practicing Namaz several times. While acknowledging the heinous nature of the crime, describing it as “horrendous, devilish, and barbaric,” the court emphasized that the case was based on circumstantial evidence and lacked proof of premeditation. Asif Ali, along with Sk Akil Ali, was convicted by the Pocso Court in Jagatsinghpur for the crime committed on November 21, 2022. This decision highlights the complexities involved in adjudicating such serious cases.
Indira Jaising urges a delay in implementing new criminal laws, concerned about their impact on access to justice and citizens’ rights. The laws replace longstanding ones, raise ambiguity over retrospective application, and compound judicial backlog. They diverge from Supreme Court precedents, potentially compromising liberties. Jaising calls for thorough debate and assessment by stakeholders before implementation.
Today, On 13th May, a Delhi court granted bail to Arun Kumar Bereddy, accused in the Amit Shah doctored video case. Bereddy, accused of operating a social media account and sharing a manipulated video, cooperated with the investigation. The court acknowledged his minimal involvement and imposed strict bail conditions. The case has drawn significant public and media interest.
Today, On 29th April, The Supreme Court extended the stay on hate speech proceedings against Tamil Nadu BJP Chief K Annamalai, reflecting ongoing legal deliberations and the complexity of balancing free speech with legal constraints. The case involves allegations of hate speech made during a political rally, with the next hearing scheduled for September 9. This high-profile case has sparked significant interest due to its potential impact on political discourse boundaries and legal regulations.
The Delhi High Court, led by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, acknowledged domestic violence concerns among female police officers, emphasizing the need for targeted support. The court overturned a judgment dismissing charges against a man accused of cruelty to his police officer wife, challenging stereotypes about police officers’ invulnerability and calling for greater gender sensitivity in judicial education.
On Thursday( 25th April), Pragya Singh Thakur, accused in the 2008 Malegaon bomb blast case, finally appeared in court after previous non-appearances, citing illness. Despite claiming illness, she submitted her statement in court and sought permission for a thumb impression due to palm weakness. The court granted her request. The trial, overseen by the NIA, is progressing with thorough examinations and statements.
Today, On 25th April,The Karnataka High Court criticized declining standards of political discourse during election campaigns in the context of DK Shivakumar’s case. The court granted interim relief to Shivakumar, criticizing the FIR against him for breaching the Model Code of Conduct. It also emphasized the need for caution in political speeches to avoid legal issues.