The Bombay High Court sentenced Vijay Dive to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment for kidnapping and attempting to sell a 14-year-old girl for prostitution. This decision emphasizes the need for stringent punishment to combat human trafficking and protect vulnerable individuals. The ruling serves as a strong message against this social evil and highlights the judiciary’s commitment to safeguarding society.
Moti Mahal has sued Daryaganj restaurant, claiming that the tagline “Creators of Butter Chicken and Dal Makhani” is deceptive. The Delhi High Court is embroiled in a legal battle over the origin of these iconic dishes. Moti Mahal asserts its founder, Mr. Gujral, as the true creator, intertwining culinary history and legal recognition.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court ruled that a parent cannot be accused of kidnapping their own child, emphasizing a mother’s role as a lawful guardian. The decision, made in the backdrop of a strained parental relationship, prioritizes the child’s best interest and reinforces equal parental rights, with significant implications for regional kidnapping laws and parental rights.
The Supreme Court of India has reprimanded the Madhya Pradesh police for failing to protect a petitioner’s family and allegedly siding with wrongdoers. The family faced threats from the spouse of a sitting Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) MLA, implicated in the death of the petitioner’s father. The case reflects a troubling disregard for judicial orders and citizen safety, prompting the Supreme Court’s intervention.
The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) will operate from 2:30 PM on January 22, aligning with the Ram Mandir inauguration at Ayodhya. This decision, in line with government office closures until 2:30 PM, reflects the event’s national significance. Adjournments for scheduled cases will be facilitated, ensuring minimal disruption while acknowledging the inauguration’s importance.
The Gujarat High Court directed officials at Sabarmati central jail to ensure legal representation for one of the 38 convicts in the 2008 Ahmedabad serial bomb blasts case, highlighting the court’s commitment to due legal process. This move underscores the judiciary’s dedication to upholding the rights of the accused, even in cases involving severe penalties.
The Madras High Court dismissed 13 Indian companies’ appeals against Google’s new billing policy. The companies were granted temporary protection from delisting for three weeks. The legal battle began in 2020 when Google mandated the use of its billing system. This case highlights the power struggle between tech giants and smaller companies in the digital market.
The Punjab and Haryana High Court has demanded explanations from the state governments on their treatment protocols for inmates with Hepatitis C, following a shortage of medical staff in jails. The inquiry was prompted by a news report revealing a high percentage of prisoners with Hepatitis C. The court emphasized the gravity of the situation and instructed both states to file detailed affidavits by January 25.
The Calcutta High Court has granted permission to the Indian Secular Front (ISF) to hold a rally at Victoria House, Kolkata, under strict conditions. State’s challenge on this order is now with the division bench. The decision balances public safety, democratic principles, and historical significance of the venue, adding complexity to the case.
The Supreme Court of India overturned the UPPSC’s rejection of a judiciary aspirant’s application due to a one-day delay, emphasizing fairness in bureaucratic procedures. Sadaf Imran’s plea highlighted the violation of her fundamental right to appear in the examination. The Court directed UPPSC to declare Imran’s results, reaffirming its commitment to justice and fairness.