![[Amit Shah's Doctored Video Case] High Court Denies Lunch Motion Moved By Delhi Police](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/MicrosoftTeams-image-25-1.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
The Telangana High Court rejected the Delhi police’s lunch motion on 9th May, in the Amit Shah morphed video case, allowing further investigation. The court instructed the police to follow due process and approach the lower court for necessary actions. The case involves allegations of doctoring a video clip of Amit Shah, leading to arrests and ongoing investigations by the Delhi and Hyderabad police.
Journalist Rajat Sharma filed a PIL in the Delhi High Court seeking action against deepfake videos. The court issued a notice to the Central Government for a response within four weeks. Sharma’s plea aims for the identification and blocking of platforms creating deepfakes, and the appointment of a nodal officer to handle complaints. He highlighted the dangers and legal gaps associated with deepfakes.
![[IAS vs IPS]| Supreme Court Urges Settlement Between IAS and IPS Officers](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/MicrosoftTeams-image-144.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
Today, On 7th May, The Supreme Court urged IAS and IPS officers to resolve their disputes for a harmonious work environment, suggesting withdrawing allegations and pursuing a settlement to prevent career harm. The court directed the officers to refrain from engaging in public conflicts and media interactions. The case has been temporarily halted for potential resolution.
Yesterday, On 30th April, The Delhi High Court classified sextortion as a grave societal threat, emphasizing its impact on victims’ privacy and psychological well-being. Justice Amit Mahajan, addressing the complexities of sextortion, denied bail to three accused individuals, highlighting the organized nature of their crimes and the need for thorough investigation before granting bail as a routine matter.
Today, 24th April,Umar Khalid’s lawyer argued in court that the allegations against him do not amount to a terrorism offense, emphasizing the lack of evidence. The defense also highlighted media scrutiny and called for a fair legal process. Khalid’s bail request is under consideration, with the next hearing scheduled for May 7. The lawyer cited inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case and urged the court to assess the evidence critically.
The Allahabad High Court granted bail to Riyaz, accused of insulting Lord Ram on Facebook. The decision based on his clean record and an apology. This case sparked debate on religious sensitivities and legal freedoms, but the court emphasized India’s secular values. The accused must now abide by certain conditions while on bail.
Today, 12th April, Advocate Shashank Shekhar Jha sent a letter to the Attorney General citing concerns about AAP supporters’ attempts to undermine the judiciary’s credibility on social media. Jha seeks permission to file a contempt of court case against AAP for misquoting the Delhi High Court and making baseless allegations. He urges the AG to address this issue to protect the judiciary’s authority.
The Supreme Court cautioned against misrepresenting facts or prejudicing ongoing legal proceedings through social media comments, expressing concern over the misuse of social media in pending court matters. They also addressed a contempt case involving premature social media claims of victory. The Court emphasized the seriousness of parties interfering with ongoing proceedings.
![[Breaking] Delhi HC's Justice Amit Sharma Recuses from Umar Khalid's Bail Plea in Delhi Riots Case; Will Hear on July 24](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/14khalid.jpeg?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
On Tuesday (9th April): The Delhi Police opposed Umar Khalid’s bail plea, alleging he spread false information on social media and incited violence during the 2020 Delhi riots. They presented evidence of his communication with various individuals to manipulate the narrative. Khalid’s request for bail hinged on lack of evidence against him, with the court set to decide on the matter.
Today ( 6th April) A complaint has been filed against Sunita Kejriwal and other leaders for sharing court proceedings on social media, violating Video Conferencing Rules. The complaint alleges a planned conspiracy to manipulate court proceedings and mislead the public. It also targets Aam Aadmi Party members and opposition parties for sharing the recordings.