Delhi High Court granted interim relief to Abhishek Bachchan, observing that unauthorized use of his name, image, likeness, and personality attributes creates public confusion and false perceptions of endorsement, thereby infringing his personality rights and causing reputational harm.
A YouTube channel has approached the Supreme Court, calling the media gag order “unprecedented and profoundly alarming,” against a Bengaluru civil court’s directive that restricts coverage in the Dharmasthala temple burial case involving Harshendra Kumar D.
Sameer Kulkarni, one of the acquitted in the Malegaon Blast case, said, “I had Rs 900 during my arrest, but only Rs 750 was shown on paper. At least return that,” expressing his wish to get the amount back.
A YouTube channel has approached the Supreme Court, calling the media gag order “unprecedented and profoundly alarming,” against a Bengaluru civil court’s directive that restricts coverage in the Dharmasthala temple burial case involving Harshendra Kumar D.
A PIL in the Madras High Court urges the creation of strict media guidelines for reporting aviation accidents. Filed by advocate M Pravin, it highlights issues of reputational harm to deceased pilots and emotional distress to families due to speculative media narratives. The case is set for hearing next week.
The Allahabad High Court granted relief to BBC journalist Mohammad Seraj Ali, who was denied a passport NOC for reporting on a mosque demolition. His article was published while he was working with the news portal, The Wire.
TMC leader Kunal Ghosh is likely to appear before a three-judge bench of the Calcutta High Court on June 16. As per sources, he has been asked to be present at 12:30 pm that day.
Actor Ajaz Khan has approached the Bombay High Court seeking anticipatory bail after Charkop police filed an FIR accusing him of repeatedly having sexual relations with a woman under the false promise of marriage.
Today, On 29th April, Supreme Court refuses to cancel FIRs against two accused of praising Afzal Guru, criticising judges. However, it allowed all FIRs to be clubbed and transferred to a Madurai court for a joint trial.
During a defamation case against CM Atishi, the complainant’s counsel argued before Justice Vikas Mahajan that the special judge acted like a political analyst. He sought a stay on the judge’s remarks, claiming they unfairly portrayed Atishi as a whistleblower. The counsel contended that her statements were “per se” defamatory. The Delhi High Court was urged to intervene and review the observations.
