Today, On 18th July, The Supreme Court has reserved its order on a plea seeking the release of terminally ill and elderly prisoners, observing, “Prison rules are all applicable individually to the states,” and urging uniform policy for compassionate release.
NEW DELHI: On February 10, the Supreme Court raised concerns regarding an FIR filed against Congress MP Imran Pratapgarhi by the Gujarat Police. The FIR was registered after Pratapgarhi allegedly posted an edited video of a provocative song. The Supreme Court bench, led by Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, questioned the reasoning behind the Gujarat High Court’s dismissal of Pratapgarhi’s plea to quash the FIR.
The draft Digital Personal Data Protection Rules, 2025, announced by the Indian government, aim to safeguard personal data, especially for children, by requiring parental consent for data collection and secure identity verification. The rules also mandate strict data security measures, timely breach notifications, and proper data retention and deletion policies. Additionally, government entities can process personal data for benefits or services, ensuring accountability. Feedback from stakeholders is open until February 18, 2025, to finalize these measures under the broader framework of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.
Today, On 17th December, the Supreme Court directed the Malankara Orthodox and Jacobite factions to maintain the current status quo regarding church management until a hearing scheduled for January 2025. The court emphasized the state’s role in ensuring peace and requested data on the population and properties of both denominations amid ongoing disputes.
The UP Government Today (Dec 12) informed the Supreme Court that it might revisit existing criminal cases where its stringent anti-gangsters law was invoked and new guidelines were being formulated on how to apply its provisions. A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan told additional solicitor general K M Nataraj, representing the government, that some of the provisions of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act appeared to be “draconian”.
The Madras High Court observed that the State must enact law and impose severe punishments against those involved in sexual offences who are family members or close friends. The Madurai Bench observed thus in a Criminal Appeal preferred by the accused against the Judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the Sessions Judge for the offence punishable under Sections 5(l), 5(n), 5(j)(ii) read with 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act).
Today, On 22nd October, Justice S Vishwajith Shetty of the Karnataka High Court requested medical records for incarcerated actor Darshan Thoogudeepa, who is seeking bail due to spine-related health issues. The court will review the medical evidence before deciding on the bail plea, connected to the murder case of auto-driver Renukaswamy.
The Karnataka High Court Today (Oct 16) issued notice to the State government on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging a government order (GO) that authorises district Wakf boards to issue marriage certificates to married Muslim couples. Court directed the State to file its reply to the petition filed by one Alam Pasha by November 12. The petitioner told the Court that the Wakf Act, 1995, did not confer any statutory powers on Wakf boards to issue marriage certificates and, therefore, the State’s order issued in August last year was illegal.