The Delhi High Court criticised a YouTuber for missing a hearing in a copyright case involving alleged theft of a teacher’s notes. The Court said he was “playing games with the court” and showed disregard for proceedings.
The Delhi High Court criticized the notion that older women should foresee marriage issues with younger partners, calling it patriarchal and misogynistic. The judge upheld a rape accusation against a man who misled a woman about marriage, asserting that each individual must be accountable for their commitments, regardless of gender stereotypes.
Today, On 20th February, The Supreme Court told Maharashtra that while its officers may face pressure, the judiciary remains independent and unaffected. The remark came during a hearing, emphasizing that courts function without external influence. The bench reaffirmed the judiciary’s role in upholding justice impartially. Maharashtra was reminded that judicial integrity cannot be compromised.
![[Badlapur Sexual Assault Case] "How Can the State Take Custodial Death So Lightly?": HC Slams CID for Negligent Probe into Killing of Accused](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/image-4-1.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Today, On 2nd December, The Bombay High Court criticized the CID for its negligent investigation into the murder of Akshay Shinde, an accused in a sexual assault case. The court expressed concerns about the lack of seriousness, emphasizing the need for thorough investigations to ensure justice. A hearing is scheduled for January 20, 2025, for further review.
BJP leader Suresh Nakhua requested more time to rectify a flawed affidavit in his defamation case against YouTuber Dhruv Rathee. Rathee sought the case’s dismissal, emphasizing Nakhua’s repeated errors. The court noted procedural issues and scheduled a hearing for February 2025, awaiting clarification on the affidavit’s compliance with new legal requirements.
The Supreme Court of India acknowledged that judges can make mistakes and emphasized the importance of correcting errors in past orders, even after a case is closed. This recognition arose while revisiting a previous decision involving Indiabulls Housing Finance, where the court had granted protection and stayed debt recovery and money laundering proceedings against the company and its officials.
The Supreme Court will review a petition challenging the appointment of Anila Varghese, former Kerala Minister Anoop Jacob’s wife, to the Kerala Bhasha Institute. The plea alleges constitutional violations and procedural irregularities, seeking to overturn the Kerala High Court’s dismissal. Manimekhala’s petition emphasizes the need for transparency and adherence to legal norms. The hearing is set for after the Supreme Court’s summer recess, beginning July 7.
The Supreme Court of India emphasized the responsibility of Advocates on Record (AoRs) after a main counsel’s absence led to an unprepared proxy counsel requesting an adjournment on May 6. The court sought an explanation from the absent AoR and adjourned the case for six weeks, underlining the critical role of AoRs in legal proceedings.