The Supreme Court ordered a public apology from a police officer who falsely implicated a man and his father-in-law, saying, “What they suffered cannot be compensated” after they spent 109 and 103 days in jail.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday witnessed an unexpected situation when a lawyer appearing via video conferencing (VC) threatened to take his own life if the court did not accept his plea in a criminal case. A Supreme Court bench consisting of Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan expressed shock over the lawyer’s statement and directed him to submit a written apology by March 7 or face serious consequences.
NEW DELHI: Today, 24th Feb, The Supreme Court of India directed that all First Information Reports (FIRs) filed against YouTuber Savukku Shankar be combined for investigation. However, the investigation in the main FIR, which was registered on May 3, 2024, at the Cyber Crime Police Station in Coimbatore, will continue separately.
The Gujarat High Court stayed proceedings against Times of India and Indian Express based on a Supreme Court order. The High Court criticized TOI for misrepresenting the situation, claiming contempt proceedings. The Court dropped contempt proceedings against the editor of Divya Bhaskar after an unconditional apology. The newspapers were criticized for sensationalizing court proceedings.
The Supreme Court fined a Gujarat police officer Rs 25,000 and accepted the judicial magistrate’s unconditional apology in a contempt case involving a wrongful arrest and remand in violation of a bail order. The court criticized the officials’ actions and emphasized the importance of upholding the rule of law. Despite pleas for leniency, the court maintained a firm stance.
![[Trademark Infringement] Bombay HC Imposed Rs 4.5 Crore Penalty On Patanjali](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/image-9-4.png?resize=447%2C360&ssl=1)
The Bombay High Court today imposed a Rs 4.5 crore penalty on Patanjali Ayurved for violating an ad-interim order that prohibited the sale of its camphor products. The decision came in a trademark infringement case where Patanjali was accused of passing off and trademark infringement. Patanjali admitted to the violation and was directed to pay an additional Rs 4 crore.
The Himachal Pradesh High Court criticized a civil court judge for issuing a coercive order without prior notice, emphasizing the violation of legal principles and fundamental rights. The judge apologized, citing workload and infrastructure issues but was warned that expeditiousness must not overlook legal requirements. The High Court highlighted the importance of judicial discipline and adherence to legal procedures.
The Supreme Court today directed the Indian Medical Association (IMA) to ensure the removal of misleading advertisements by Patanjali Ayurved. It particularly targets 14 products whose licenses were revoked. The court appointed an amicus curiae and instructed the licensing authority to submit an affidavit regarding the licensing process. IMA president issued an unconditional apology.
![[BREAKING] Patanjali Case | "Your Public Apology Published Was Illegible, Font Miniscule": SC Slams IMA President Over His 'Damaging' Statements](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/shared-image.jpeg?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
The Indian Medical Association’s Chief, Dr. R V Asokan, publicly apologized for remarks made about the Supreme Court, clarifying that he meant no disrespect. This followed the Court’s comments during a case involving misleading advertisements. The IMA has filed a petition against such ads and emphasizes the priority of promoting ethical practices within the association.