Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal’s plea challenging the Delhi High Court’s decision to uphold the summons in a criminal defamation case will be heard by the Supreme Court. The case involves a retweet of an allegedly defamatory video. Kejriwal admitted to making a mistake, and the Supreme Court asked if he wished to apologize. The matter highlights the gravity of the issue, as public figures’ social media actions carry weight with the public.
The Managing Director of Patanjali Ayurveda, Acharya Balkrishna, filed a plea against the President of the Indian Medical Association (IMA), Dr. RV Asokan, for disparaging remarks about the Supreme Court. This arises from the Court’s criticism of IMA’s unethical practices. Simultaneously, the Supreme Court is hearing a petition by IMA against Patanjali Ayurveda for misleading advertisements.
In July, the Supreme Court will address challenges to the 28% Goods and Services Tax (GST) on online gaming companies. Several petitions contest the tax’s validity and its impact on the industry. The court will hear concerns raised by Baazi Networks Private Limited and other online gaming companies and address pending petitions. The tax notices were issued retrospectively, alleging GST evasion of Rs 1.12 lakh crore.
On Wednesday (24th April): Arvind Kejriwal’s plea challenging his arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) was contested in the Supreme Court, with the agency citing his non-cooperation during the investigation. The ED maintains that Kejriwal’s behaviour warranted his arrest, while the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) accuses the ED of falsehoods and serving the interests of the BJP. Kejriwal is in judicial custody at Tihar jail.
Today(on 24th April), Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal granted two-week extension for rejoinder in the Delhi excise policy case against the ED. The court allowed time for filing legal documents and arguments due to Kejriwal’s arrest and contested summons. The case resumes on May 14. Legal dispute centers on alleged financial mismanagement linked to the Delhi liquor policy.
The Calcutta High Court ruled in favor of Emami, prohibiting HUL from using the ‘Glow & Handsome’ trademark for men’s care products. This decision highlights the significance of protecting intellectual property rights in the beauty industry. Amid intense competition in the beauty sector, the ruling sets a precedent for similar trademark disputes, impacting future legal battles.
On Monday(8th April), A Mumbai court allowed the release of the film ‘Maidaan’ despite legal disputes and unpaid bills. The company supplying goods for the film sought to stop its release due to unpaid bills, but the court refused to grant an injunction. The film’s producers were directed to provide a bank guarantee of Rs. 96,06,743 within two weeks.
Today(on 8th April), The Delhi High Court reprimanded Advocate Jai Anant Dehadrai for speaking to the media after his defamation case hearing against Mahua Moitra. The court summoned Moitra and emphasized that making allegations without an injunction grants Moitra the right to defend herself. The court adjourned the case until April 25. Dehadrai sought Rs. 2 crore in damages and requested media outlets to remove defamatory content.
Former Mumbai police officer Pradeep Sharma has appealed to the Supreme Court against his life imprisonment verdict in a 2006 fake encounter case. The Bombay High Court upheld convictions of 13 other defendants, stating that the police orchestrated the killing to appear genuine. Sharma is also facing separate accusations related to the killing of businessman Mansukh Hiran.
The Bombay High Court has rejected Rakhi Sawant’s anticipatory bail plea regarding allegations by her estranged husband about the unauthorized distribution of private videos. Sawant faces charges under defamation, common intention, and publishing sexually explicit material electronically. The court dismissed her plea stating the withdrawal of the plea by her lawyer as a pivotal factor.