Engineer Rashid informs the Delhi High Court that he is unable to attend Parliament sessions and represent his constituency due to the court’s Rs 4 lakh travel expense condition.
Supreme Court dismisses challenge to ISIS terror designation under UAPA, saying terms like “caliphate” must be read in terror context. Petitioner told to seek remedy through criminal court, not writ plea.
Today, On 29th July, Delhi High Court told detained MP Engineer Rashid to go back to the original bench for bail modification, refusing to hear a fresh plea. Saying “Not happening today,” the Court posted the matter for hearing on July 31.
Petitions challenge government’s approval for release of movie based on Kanhaiya Lal’s murder.
CBFC re-certification request by producers also under consideration.
Delhi High Court has sought NIA’s reply on jailed MP Engineer Rashid’s plea seeking interim bail or government-funded security to attend the Monsoon Session of Parliament. He objected to a ₹17 lakh personal cost for 12 days.
The Bombay High Court has upheld the constitutional validity of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), dismissing a petition by Anil Babura Baile, linked to the Elgar Parishad case. The court concluded that the law’s provisions are constitutional despite criticisms regarding misuse to suppress dissent.
Supreme Court directs Hany Babu to approach High Court or trial court for bail in the Elgar Parishad case. The Court refused to clarify its earlier order and granted liberty to revive his withdrawn plea.
Even digital posts inciting terrorism fall under UAPA, says Delhi HC while denying bail to the accused who allegedly radicalized youth online.
A Delhi court has deferred its decision on MP Engineer Rashid’s plea for bail or custody parole to attend the Parliament’s monsoon session. The final order will be pronounced on July 21 amid ongoing terror funding trial.
Supreme Court says it didn’t pass any written order on plea against Udaipur Files, only refused urgent listing. Clarification comes after confusion over court’s oral remark: “Let the film be released.”
