Mumbai (Maharashtra) [India], April 8 (ANI): BJP MLA Nitesh Rane has filed a reply to the assistant commissioner of police and has refused to furnish a bond of good behaviour after a notice was issued to Nitesh Rane under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) 110 to furnish a bond of good behaviour and termed the show cause notice "bad in law".

Bengaluru (Karnataka) [India], March 15 (ANI): The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday said that the way, hijab imbroglio unfolded gives scope for the argument that some "unseen hands" are at work to engineer social unrest and disharmony.

New Delhi Jan 31 PTI President Ram Nath Kovind has rejected a petition seeking disqualification of Rajeev Satavs Rajya Sabha membership for allegedly holding a subsisting contract with a government companyThe Congress MP during the pendency of the petition had passed away on May 16 2021The January 6 order put in the public domain by the Election Commission on Monday says that Satav the respondent has not incurred disqualification for being a member of Parliament The order is based on the opinion rendered by Election Commission on the issue in April 2021Two people had moved a joint petition in September 2020 seeking disqualification of Satav as an RS member for holding a subsisting contract with a government companyThe petition was referred to Election Commission in October 2020 for its opinionSatav submitted his defence in March 2021 to the EC claiming that Indian Oil Corporation is not an appropriate government and the distributorship agreement with Indian Oil Corporation does not qualify as works within the meaning of section 9A of the Representation of the People Act 1951The EC opined that Indian Oil Corporation is not an appropriate government within the meaning of section 9A of the Representation of the People Act 1951The Election Commission concluded that the respondent Satav has no subsisting contract with the appropriate government which would attract disqualification under section 9A of the Representation of People Act 1951Now therefore having considered the matter in the light of the opinion rendered by the Election Commissio of India I Ram Nath Kovind President Of India in exercise of the powers conferred on me under Article 103 of the Constitution of India do hereby hold that the Respondent has not incurred disqualification for being a Member of Parliament under article 1021e of the Constitution of India read with section 9A of the Representation of the People Act 1951 the order read PTI NAB NAB RT RT

New Delhi Jan 31 PTI The Delhi High Court on Monday sought the stand of microblogging platform Twitter on a petition challenging the out of the blue illegal suspension of a user account for alleged violation of its rules Justice V Kameswar Rao issued notice and also sought the central governments response on the petition by Dimple Kaul who claimed that her Twitter handle had more than 255000 followers and was used for posting educational content related to history literature politics archaeology Indic culture non-violence equality and womens rights The court also issued notice on another petition against suspension of the Twitter account of user Suyash Deep Rai Lawyer Raghav Awasthi appearing for both the petitioners contended that Twitter was deleting profiles as per its own sweet will and they have no right to do so in law and asserted that the accounts be restored during the pendency of the petitions Senior advocate Sajan Poovayya representing the US-based social media platform said that a writ petition was not maintainable against Twitter which is a private entity and sought time to file a response He said that granting any interim relief in the present cases would be as good as granting final relief Awasthi highlighted that a similar petition by a senior advocate against the suspension of his Twitter account is already pending before the court We will finally hear the petitions said the court which directed that the present case be listed on the same day as the pending petition - March 30 Kaul has submitted that she was informed by Twitter that her account which was followed by several eminent personalities was suspended for violating the platforms rules against ban evasion even when there was no such prior incident She has claimed that she was not granted any opportunity of being heard and the illegal action of the respondent No2 Twitter has caused the petitioner to face the kind of mental and emotional trauma which cannot be expressed in words Petitioner along with her research team put a lot of money and time on researching educational content and posted various threads for information and knowledge of general public On 20012022 Out of the blue the petitioner received an email from the respondent No2 regarding the suspension of the Twitter account created by the petitioner the petition filed through lawyer Mukesh Sharma has said The petitioner has asserted that Twitter performs a public function and is bound by Sections 79 of the Information Technology Act 2000 as well as the Information Technology Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code Rules 2021 There is no sanction for the suo-motu actions of the respondent No2 in suspending the Twitter Account of the Petitioner under the Information Technology Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code Rules 2021 either As a matter of fact the same could lead to the Respondent No2 losing its intermediary status under the law the petition has argued It has further contended that the suspension is in violation of Articles 14 19 and 21 of the Constitution of India as it is an impairment of the right to free speech and is arbitrary PTI ADS SA

New Delhi [India], January 28 (ANI): A plea filed has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking prohibition of any exhibition or publication of the film "Why I killed Gandhi" or any of its contents in any manner whatsoever on any OTT platform or social media.

New Delhi Jan 27 PTI The Delhi High Court has expressed anguish at false complaints of sexual harassment made at the drop of a hat and said that such incidents trivialise the offence and hamper the cause of women empowerment Justice Subramonium Prasad while quashing an FIR registered against the petitioner an Assistant Professor at the University of Delhi for the alleged commission of offences under Sections 354A sexual harassment506 criminal intimidation of IPC stated that false allegations cast a doubt on the veracity of complaints filed by the real victims of sexual harassment This Court expresses its anguish at how provisions such as Sections 354A506 IPC are falsely invoked at the drop of a hat to register ones displeasure at the conduct of another individual This merely trivialises the offence of sexual harassment and casts a doubt on the veracity of the allegations filed by every other victim who has in reality faced sexual thereby setting back the cause of women empowerment the judge said in a recent order The FIR was registered against the petitioner pursuant to a dispute with his neighbour over allegedly illegal construction The petitioner claimed that in response to a complaint made by him against the complainant neighbour for abusing and threatening him and his wife the complainant filed the FIR against him The court said the perusal of the material on record revealed that the contents of the FIR were sketchy and without any specifics regarding the offences which prima facie indicated that it arose from bald allegations and contradictory statements A comprehensive reading of the matter at hand reveals that the impugned FIR was merely a counterblast and was solely registered to arm-twist the Petitioner and his wife into withdrawing the complaints that had been filed against Respondent No2 complainant and her family it added The court further observed that the petitioner filed several complaints in relation to the construction in his neighbourhood and it was evident that the instant FIR was maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the Petitioner and with a view to spite him and his wife due to a private and personal grudge The court stated that it deemed it fit to exercise its inherent power to quash the FIR to prevent the abuse of the process of any court and to secure the ends of justice PTI ADS SA

New Delhi Nov 18 PTI The Delhi High Court has directed the Centre to place before the Appointments Committee of the Cabinet a 2019 proposal for appointment to the post of Director National School of Drama and set aside a subsequent selection process initiated in 2020Justice Jyoti Singh said that if the name of Dr J Thulaseedhara Kurup who filed a petition for appointment to the post as per the result of a selection process initiated in 2018 if approved he shall be appointed to the post of Director NSD forthwithThe exercise shall be carried out by the Ministry of Culture within two weeks said the judge who observed that despite being duly qualified and eligible for the post the petitioner became a victim of the circumstances and the delay in the process of selection which remains unexplained and unjustified In view of the material placed before it the court noted that the petitioner was in the first position in the merit listThe court allowed the petition with a direction that costs of Rs 25000 be paid to the petitioner by the MinistryKurup claimed that his name was recommended for the post but the Ministry of Culture instead of concluding the selection process on time raised issues concerning his qualificationsDuring the pendency of the petition a fresh notification was issued by the authorities in 2020 inviting applications for the post of Director NSDIt is a settled law that a candidate has right of consideration and had Respondent No2 Ministry of Culture acted diligently the proposal forwarded by Respondent No2 would have received consideration by Respondent No3 ACC Petitioner has clearly been wronged and in my view his case deserves consideration by Respondent No3 in accordance with the law the judge said in her order passed on November 16The court stated that the Centre did not comply with the timelines set by it to complete the process in a time-bound manner andobserved that it was clear from the files and the affidavits that efforts were made to delay and stall the processEven today before this Court the explanation for delay borders on the usual and routine reasons ie movement of files from one Department to the other inter-departmental consultations queries and clarifications and finally the plea of validity of the panelAs afore-noted the movement of the file and the communications by Respondent No2 do not satisfy the conscience of this Court that diligent steps were taken by Respondent No2 to ensure that timelines are adhered to not only because of the hanging sword of the DoPT OM but also the need to abide by the binding and enduring directions of a Court of Law After perusing the files and the affidavits the position is crystal clear that efforts were made to delay and stall the process the court saidFor all the aforesaid reasons the writ petition is allowed Notification dated July 17 2020 and the process of selection pursuant thereto are hereby quashed and set aside Respondent No2 is directed to place the recommendation of Respondent No1 along with its proposal dated July 11 2019 before Respondent No3 for its consideration the court orderedPTI ADS RKS RKS