The Calcutta High Court scheduled a June 10 hearing on Trinamool Congress MP Abhishek Banerjee’s plea seeking protection from coercive action by the CID in an alleged signature-forgery investigation involving party legislators. The matter will be heard after the court’s summer vacation concludes.
The Kerala High Court held that persons with Down Syndrome are entitled to protections under the National Trust Act and ruled that guardianship applications cannot be rejected merely because the condition is not expressly mentioned in the statute, granting relief to a father seeking guardianship of his daughter.
The Allahabad High Court held that a mother’s alleged remarriage cannot defeat the independent statutory right of minor children to claim maintenance from their biological father, reaffirming that a father’s obligation to maintain his children continues regardless of matrimonial disputes or changes in the mother’s marital status.
The Delhi High Court has held that allegations of physical assault, verbal abuse, and obscene or inappropriate conduct within a household at the interim stage fall within the broad definition of domestic violence under the PWDV Act 2005.
The Telangana Legislative Assembly approved the Telangana Advocates Protection Bill, 2026, ensuring police protection, safeguards against false cases, and a dedicated grievance redressal system for lawyers. Minister Sridhar Babu Duddilla said the law, shaped by Bar Council inputs, strengthens advocates’ safety, confidence, and professional independence.
The Uttarakhand High Court reprimanded a runaway couple who married against family wishes but directed police protection. Justice Rakesh Thapliyal heard the case involving an 18-year-old woman and 21-year-old man facing threats from her relatives.
The Kerala High Court said maligning a woman’s character without any basis amounts to a “pernicious form of social violence” that deeply harms dignity. It added that valuing a woman’s image over her accomplishments “exposes society’s intellectual poverty.”
The Bombay High Court held that Shatrughan Sinha’s iconic “Khamosh” dialogue is exclusively connected to his personal identity alone. It further prohibited using his name, images, voice or any other personal attributes to create online content without consent.
The Delhi High Court moved to protect singer Jubin Nautiyal’s personality rights but sharply questioned why celebrities avoid their local courts, asking pointedly whether Uttarakhand lacks jurisdiction or even access to platforms like Google in such legal disputes.
Shatrughan Sinha moved the Bombay High Court for protection of rights, alleging online misuse and his “Khamosh” dialogue. Justice Sharmila Deshmukh reserved orders on relief, as Sinha invoked privacy under Article 21 and performers’ rights, warning clips damage reputation.
