The Supreme Court dismissed a petition against the 2024 Maharashtra elections, ruling there was no evidence of malpractice or fraud. The Court said there was no material, much less authentic, to prove any irregularity during poll closing hours.
NEW DELHI: On January 20, 2025, the Supreme Court of India refused to entertain a writ petition that sought the establishment of a dedicated Ministry for senior citizens. The petition, filed by Advocate G Priyadharshi, a lawyer and social worker, was withdrawn after the Court allowed the petitioner to make a representation to the relevant government ministries instead.
The Jammu and Kashmir High Court recognized that the Bar Council of India guidelines do not permit female advocates to appear in court with their faces covered. This was highlighted after a claimant, Advocate Syed Ainain Qadri, refused to remove her covering. Ultimately, the Court dismissed the related case on December 13.
The Bombay High Court dismissed on Thursday (19th Dec) Shiv Sena leader Amol Kirtikar’s petition challenging Ravindra Waikar’s election victory by 48 votes in the Mumbai North-West Lok Sabha constituency. Kirtikar alleged election irregularities, particularly regarding tendered votes, but the court found the petition non-maintainable. A detailed order will follow.
Today, On 25th October, the Supreme Court dismissed the CBI’s petition to reinstate a lookout circular against Rhea Chakraborty, labeling it “frivolous.” This ruling upholds the Bombay High Court’s prior decision, affirming that Rhea and her family are well-established in society. The case emerges from the investigation into Sushant Singh Rajput’s death.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court criticized a lawyer for attempting to secure a favorable judgment by pressuring the court with concerns about losing his legal fees. The court emphasized that an advocate’s profession is not a business and should not focus on fee recovery. The petition was ultimately dismissed, highlighting the professional duty of lawyers to prioritize their clients’ cases over financial interests.
Today(on 4th July), The Delhi High Court dismissed petitions seeking video recordings of election processes in Uttar Pradesh’s Fatehpur Sikri and Aligarh constituencies, citing jurisdictional limitations, as the events occurred outside Delhi. The petitioners, candidates in the 2024 elections, were advised to seek remedies within Uttar Pradesh jurisdiction. The court emphasized that the Election Commission of India’s office location does not confer jurisdiction on Delhi High Court.
