Kerala High Court grants bail to IB officer Sukanth Suresh after 44 days in jail. He was accused of abetting his girlfriend’s suicide under false promise of marriage.
Sharjeel Imam, accused in the February 2020 Delhi riots, claims he was “completely disconnected” from co-accused Umar Khalid and the events of violence. His counsel seeks compassionate bail after five years in custody, arguing no evidence links Imam to inciting unrest, while emphasizing his significant personal challenges during imprisonment.
The Delhi High Court quashed a rape FIR against a man, emphasizing that while rape is a serious crime, some individuals misuse legal provisions to harass men. Justice Chandra Dhari Singh highlighted evidence of consensual relations and ulterior motives behind the complaint, stating that proceeding with the trial would cause unnecessary hardship.
Umar Khalid, a former JNU student and activist, has spent four years in jail awaiting the framing of charges under the UAPA in connection with the 2020 Delhi riots. Despite being acquitted in one case, he remains detained due to a second case invoking anti-terror laws. Legal proceedings have been slow, raising concerns about justice in UAPA cases.
The Delhi’s Karkardooma Court started hearing arguments on charges in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case. The prosecution stated the investigation is ongoing, but the court observed that the investigation regarding the accused persons is complete. The accused individuals, including Umar Khalid and Safoora Zargar, face stringent charges under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act. The hearing will continue on September 6.
The Delhi High Court ruled that WhatsApp chats cannot be admitted as evidence in court without proper certification under the Indian Evidence Act. This decision came in the case of Dell International Services India Private Limited v. Adeel Feroze, addressing delays in filing a written statement in a consumer dispute complaint. The ruling highlights the need for certification of electronic evidence and adherence to procedural timelines in consumer disputes.
On Thursday(14th March), The CBI informed the Jharkhand High Court that the scrutiny of WhatsApp chats belonging to two convicted individuals in Judge Uttam Anand’s murder revealed no substantial findings. The investigation aimed to uncover potential connections to others involved, but the chats did not yield significant leads. This case highlights the challenges of using digital communications as evidence in criminal investigations.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has presented incriminating WhatsApp chats as evidence in their pursuit to extend the custody of former Jharkhand Chief Minister Hemant Soren. The chats with his aide reveal discussions about properties linked to a money laundering case. This case is pivotal in addressing corruption and upholding accountability in public office.
