sadalawpublications.com

A DYNAMIC LAW JOURNAL

Menu

Sadalaw

Indonesia Protests Turn Deadly as Parliament Building Torched in Makassar

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Indonesia Protests Turn Deadly as Parliament Building Torched in Makassar Bolivia’s Opposition Leader Luis Fernando Camacho Released from Jail — A Political Turning Point U.S. Senator Roger Wicker Pushes Joint Weapons Production with Taiwan, Raising Tensions with China Santhosh Maize & Industries Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu & Anr. (2023) – Supreme Court on Tax Classification of Maize Starch & Retrospective Clarifications LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT JM FINANCIAL HOME LOANS LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT VISTAAR FINANCE LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT FORESIGHT LAW OFFICES INDIA, DELHI Pradeep v. State of Haryana (2023) – Supreme Court Acquits Accused, Cautions on Sole Testimony of Child Witness Rahul Ganpatrao Sable v. Laxman Maruti Jadhav (Dead) through LRs & Ors. – Supreme Court Enhances Motor Accident Compensation (2023) Dhanraj N. Asawani v. Amarjeetsingh Mohindersingh Basi & Ors. (2023): Right of Shareholder to Initiate Criminal Proceedings in Co-operative Bank Scam Indonesia Protests Turn Deadly as Parliament Building Torched in Makassar Shristi Singh 30 AUG 2025 Deadly protests erupt in Makassar, South Sulawesi, as demonstrators torch the parliament building. With three killed and rising unrest, President Prabowo Subianto faces mounting political and economic challenges. Introduction Violence escalated in South Sulawesi on 30 August 2025, when protesters set fire to the regional parliament building in Makassar. The incident left three dead and at least five injured, intensifying unrest fueled by economic frustration and anger over a controversial parliamentary pay hike. The turmoil poses one of the most serious tests yet for President Prabowo Subianto’s administration, raising urgent questions about governance and public trust. Background: From Grievance to Flames The unrest traces back to Jakarta, where student-led protests began following the death of Affan Kurniawan, a ride-hailing driver killed after being struck by an armored police vehicle. Outrage grew after lawmakers proposed a significant pay increase, viewed by many Indonesians as a symbol of political elitism. What started as localized protests quickly spread nationwide. By late August, demonstrations engulfed major cities, with Sulawesi emerging as a key flashpoint. Key Incident Details Casualties The fire at the Makassar regional parliament left three dead, including at least two victims trapped inside, and five injured, some from leaping out of the burning building. President’s Response Prabowo Subianto personally visited victims’ families and ordered a full investigation, signaling the gravity of the crisis. Aftermath Smaller incidents of looting were reported in Jakarta. Public transport services such as MRT Jakarta and TransJakarta faced disruptions as demonstrations spread across the capital. National Response Government: Issued condolences and temporarily paused the parliamentary pay hike. Security forces placed major cities on high alert. Protesters: Expanded their demands, calling not only for reversing the pay hike but also for justice sector reform and political accountability. Public Opinion: Sympathy for protesters remains high, with many Indonesians seeing the movement as a watershed moment for democratic accountability. Analysis 1. Growing Public Frustration High living costs and disillusionment with political elites have fueled nationwide unrest. 2. Governance Under Threat The violent turn—arson, deaths, and looting—represents a direct challenge to the government’s crisis management capacity. 3. Push for Reform Long-term stability will likely require structural reforms, addressing not only economic inequality but also political engagement and accountability. Conclusion What began as anger over a tragic accident and a pay controversy has transformed into one of Indonesia’s most significant protest movements in years. With lives lost and democratic institutions under siege, the government faces a stark choice: rely on force, or embrace political renewal and reform to restore balance. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sadalaw. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Indonesia Protests Turn Deadly as Parliament Building Torched in Makassar Sadalaw • August 30, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Bolivia’s Opposition Leader Luis Fernando Camacho Released from Jail — A Political Turning Point Sadalaw • August 30, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments U.S. Senator Roger Wicker Pushes Joint Weapons Production with Taiwan, Raising Tensions with China Sadalaw • August 30, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Indonesia Protests Turn Deadly as Parliament Building Torched in Makassar Read More »

Bolivia’s Opposition Leader Luis Fernando Camacho Released from Jail — A Political Turning Point

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Bolivia’s Opposition Leader Luis Fernando Camacho Released from Jail — A Political Turning Point U.S. Senator Roger Wicker Pushes Joint Weapons Production with Taiwan, Raising Tensions with China Santhosh Maize & Industries Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu & Anr. (2023) – Supreme Court on Tax Classification of Maize Starch & Retrospective Clarifications LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT JM FINANCIAL HOME LOANS LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT VISTAAR FINANCE LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT FORESIGHT LAW OFFICES INDIA, DELHI Pradeep v. State of Haryana (2023) – Supreme Court Acquits Accused, Cautions on Sole Testimony of Child Witness Rahul Ganpatrao Sable v. Laxman Maruti Jadhav (Dead) through LRs & Ors. – Supreme Court Enhances Motor Accident Compensation (2023) Dhanraj N. Asawani v. Amarjeetsingh Mohindersingh Basi & Ors. (2023): Right of Shareholder to Initiate Criminal Proceedings in Co-operative Bank Scam Uggarsain v. State of Haryana – Supreme Court on Uniformity and Proportionality in Sentencing for Group Offences Bolivia’s Opposition Leader Luis Fernando Camacho Released from Jail — A Political Turning Point Shristi Singh 30 AUG 2025 Bolivian opposition leader Luis Fernando Camacho freed after nearly three years in detention. The annulment of Jeanine Áñez’s case signals a major judicial shift, reshaping Bolivia’s political landscape ahead of upcoming elections. Introduction In a landmark judicial decision, Bolivian opposition leader Luis Fernando Camacho was released on 30 August 2025 after nearly three years in custody. His freedom coincided with the annulment of criminal proceedings against former interim president Jeanine Áñez, marking a turning point in Bolivia’s politics. Supporters celebrated both moves as steps toward national reconciliation after years of deep political polarization. Background & Context Camacho, a right-wing civic leader, played a central role in the 2019 Bolivian political crisis, which culminated in the resignation of then-president Evo Morales. His subsequent imprisonment became a symbol of the fractured divide between left-wing and conservative forces in Bolivia. Áñez, who briefly assumed the interim presidency, faced charges over alleged abuses of power during her short rule. The coincidence of Camacho’s release with Áñez’s legal vindication suggests an intentional judicial effort to ease political tensions. The Release and Its Implications Judicial Decisions Camacho was moved to house arrest, effectively ending his extended imprisonment. At the same time, Bolivia’s judiciary annulled proceedings against Áñez, dismissing one of the nation’s most contentious political trials. Political Significance Analysts suggest these rulings represent a strategic shift toward political appeasement, possibly aimed at reducing polarization or stabilizing conditions before Bolivia’s next election cycle. Opposition Momentum With his release, Camacho is poised to re-enter the political arena, likely strengthening opposition voices and shaping the debate around constitutional reforms and democracy. Political Reactions Opposition Parties: Celebrated the rulings, framing them as steps toward restorative justice and reconciliation. Áñez’s Camp: Declared vindication, calling for deeper reforms to address political persecution. Government Response: Official statements stressed judicial independence, though observers note the timing suggests political calculation. Analysis 1. Resetting Polarization The release of Camacho and annulment of Áñez’s charges may be a tactical olive branch in Bolivia’s polarized political environment. 2. Electoral Strategy Authorities could be aiming to defuse tensions before a potentially volatile election season. 3. Long-Term Stability Although the judiciary’s decisions create space for renewed dialogue, partisan mistrust remains a significant barrier to reconciliation. Conclusion The judicial release of Luis Fernando Camacho and dismissal of charges against Jeanine Áñez mark a defining moment in Bolivia’s political story. Whether this move fosters genuine reconciliation or sparks new political clashes depends on the actions of both government and opposition leaders in the months ahead. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sadalaw. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Bolivia’s Opposition Leader Luis Fernando Camacho Released from Jail — A Political Turning Point Sadalaw • August 30, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments U.S. Senator Roger Wicker Pushes Joint Weapons Production with Taiwan, Raising Tensions with China Sadalaw • August 30, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection to Journalist Abhisar Sharma in Assam FIR Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Bolivia’s Opposition Leader Luis Fernando Camacho Released from Jail — A Political Turning Point Read More »

U.S. Senator Roger Wicker Pushes Joint Weapons Production with Taiwan, Raising Tensions with China

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today U.S. Senator Roger Wicker Pushes Joint Weapons Production with Taiwan, Raising Tensions with China Santhosh Maize & Industries Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu & Anr. (2023) – Supreme Court on Tax Classification of Maize Starch & Retrospective Clarifications LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT JM FINANCIAL HOME LOANS LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT VISTAAR FINANCE LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT FORESIGHT LAW OFFICES INDIA, DELHI Pradeep v. State of Haryana (2023) – Supreme Court Acquits Accused, Cautions on Sole Testimony of Child Witness Rahul Ganpatrao Sable v. Laxman Maruti Jadhav (Dead) through LRs & Ors. – Supreme Court Enhances Motor Accident Compensation (2023) Dhanraj N. Asawani v. Amarjeetsingh Mohindersingh Basi & Ors. (2023): Right of Shareholder to Initiate Criminal Proceedings in Co-operative Bank Scam Uggarsain v. State of Haryana – Supreme Court on Uniformity and Proportionality in Sentencing for Group Offences S. Narahari v. S.R. Kumar – Supreme Court Refers Maintainability of Second SLP after Withdrawal to Larger Bench (2023) U.S. Senator Roger Wicker Pushes Joint Weapons Production with Taiwan, Raising Tensions with China Shristi Singh 30 AUG 2025 U.S. Senator Roger Wicker’s call for joint weapons production with Taiwan sparks sharp criticism from China, intensifying U.S.-Taiwan defense ties and reshaping Indo-Pacific security dynamics. Introduction During his visit to Taiwan on 30 August 2025, U.S. Senator Roger Wicker—Chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee—voiced strong support for joint weapons production with Taipei, including advanced drones. His remarks highlight growing U.S.-Taiwan security collaboration and drew immediate condemnation from Beijing, underscoring heightened geopolitical stakes in the Taiwan Strait. Context & Background China continues to assert sovereignty over Taiwan, threatening military action to enforce reunification. Under the Taiwan Relations Act, the U.S. provides indirect arms support, positioning itself as a key defense partner. Wicker’s visit signals Washington’s deepening strategic engagement amid global supply-chain realignments and rising Indo-Pacific security tensions. Core Developments Weapons Collaboration Senator Wicker stressed that strategic drones and other weapons could be co-manufactured in Taiwan to strengthen its defensive readiness. Informal Security Alliance Although the U.S. lacks formal diplomatic ties with Taiwan, such visits reinforce Taipei’s access to U.S. defense cooperation, directly countering China’s military posturing. Beijing’s Reaction Chinese officials condemned the visit as “interference,” warning that such moves cross Beijing’s red lines. Regional & Domestic Responses Taipei: Welcomed Wicker’s proposal, calling it validation of its asymmetric defense strategy. Washington: U.S. lawmakers, particularly defense hawks, praised the initiative, while the administration has yet to issue a formal policy. Beijing: Branded the visit provocative, warning of potential retaliation against “U.S.-Taiwan collusion.” Analysis 1. Deterrence Messaging The shift from arms sales to co-production represents a strategic escalation in U.S.-Taiwan defense ties. 2. Legal Grey Zone Without official diplomatic relations, congressional-led initiatives create space for security collaboration beyond direct executive approval. 3. Regional Ripple Effect Other Asia-Pacific democracies are closely monitoring developments. China may respond with increased military pressure on regional neighbors. Conclusion Senator Roger Wicker’s Taiwan visit and call for joint weapons production represent a turning point in U.S.-Taiwan relations. While strengthening deterrence against China, the move also sharpens the region’s geopolitical fault lines, leaving the Indo-Pacific on edge. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sadalaw. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases U.S. Senator Roger Wicker Pushes Joint Weapons Production with Taiwan, Raising Tensions with China Sadalaw • August 30, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection to Journalist Abhisar Sharma in Assam FIR Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Kerala High Court Rules Judges Must Personally View Obscene Video Evidence Before Conviction Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

U.S. Senator Roger Wicker Pushes Joint Weapons Production with Taiwan, Raising Tensions with China Read More »

LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT JM FINANCIAL HOME LOANS

Leave a Comment / JOB /

LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT JM FINANCIAL HOME LOANS Sweta Kumari About JM Financial Group JM Financial Group is one of India’s prominent financial services groups, specialising in providing a spectrum of businesses to corporations, financial institutions, high net-worth individuals and retail investors. Known for diverse businesses such as Investment Banking, Equity, Debt, Commodity Sales and Trading, Wealth Management, Portfolio Management Services, Asset Management, Alternative Asset Management, Financing and Lending and Distressed Asset Management, the JM Financial Group is a significant conglomerate in the financial services space. About the Job JM Financial Home Loans Ltd has an opening for Legal Manager. Eligibility Qualification – LLB/LLM Vertical – Non-Litigation Salary Salary- Up to 7 lacs pa Location Ahmedabad and Nashik How to Apply? If you are eligible, pls send your resume to kranti.rane@jmfl.com Never miss an opportunity! Click to join our whatsapp channel More Oppurtunities LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT JM FINANCIAL HOME LOANS Sadalaw • August 30, 2025 LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT VISTAAR FINANCE Sadalaw • August 30, 2025 LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT FORESIGHT LAW OFFICES INDIA, DELHI Sadalaw • August 30, 2025 1 2 3 Next »

LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT JM FINANCIAL HOME LOANS Read More »

LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT VISTAAR FINANCE

Leave a Comment / Internship /

LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT VISTAAR FINANCE Sweta Kumari About Vistaar Finance Vistaar Finance is one of the best small business finance companies which provides easy MSME & SME business loan for small businesses at affordable interest. About the Internship Looking to kickstart your legal career with hands-on experience? Their legal team at Vistaar Finance is looking for interns for a 2–3 month paid internship. Duration 2-3 months Stipend Yes, it’s a paid opportunity! Location BTM 2nd Stage, Bangalore How to Apply? If you’re passionate about legal work and ready to dive in, send your resume to padmashree.m@vistaarfinance.com. Never miss an opportunity! Click to join our whatsapp channel More Oppurtunities LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT VISTAAR FINANCE Sadalaw • August 30, 2025 LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT FORESIGHT LAW OFFICES INDIA, DELHI Sadalaw • August 30, 2025 LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CHAMBERS FOR JUSTICE, DELHI Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 1 2 3 Next »

LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT VISTAAR FINANCE Read More »

LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT FORESIGHT LAW OFFICES INDIA, DELHI

Leave a Comment / Internship /

LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT FORESIGHT LAW OFFICES INDIA, DELHI Sweta Kumari About the Organisation Foresight Law Offices India, founded by Varun Singh, a legal luminary with over 11 years of expertise, is rooted in the prowess of advanced legal strategy. At Foresight Law Offices India, they surpass redefining legal standards; they set new benchmarks. Startups navigate legal landscapes with agility, providing tailored strategic solutions. About the Internship Foresight Law Offices India is elated to extend an internship opportunity at the firm’s New Delhi office situated at Defence Colony. Key practice areas: Constitutional Law, Criminal Law, Service Law, Commercial & Contracts Law, Intellectual Property Law, Arbitration, etc. Eligibility A student pursuing law who is currently in the 3rd, 4th or 5th year of law school in a 5-year integrated program or 2nd or 3rd year of law school in a 3-year degree program having a passion for diverse litigation, general corporate and intellectual property matters. Prior experience of similar work shall be given preference. Work Profile Extensive research on varied subjects of law, including but not limited to contracts, intellectual property, constitution, criminal, arbitration and insolvency & bankruptcy. (Major Part –The student must be adept at reading and understanding the law and search relevant judgements using SCC Online & Manupatra). Assistance in drafting related SLPs, Writs, Commercial Suits etc. along with commercial contracts, settlement agreements, MoUs, etc. Any other ancillary work as and when required. Duration September 2025 and the upcoming months. Date of Joining First day of the month applied for. Mode (Online/Offline/Both/Hybrid) In-Office or Hybrid Stipend None No of Vacancies 3-5 Location B-50, Defence Colony, New Delhi. Last Date to Apply Rolling Applications How to Apply? Send your CV to info@foresightlaw.in   Never miss an opportunity! Click to join our whatsapp channel More Oppurtunities LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT FORESIGHT LAW OFFICES INDIA, DELHI Sadalaw • August 30, 2025 LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CHAMBERS FOR JUSTICE, DELHI Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT AVNEESH ARPUTHAM Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 1 2 3 Next »

LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT FORESIGHT LAW OFFICES INDIA, DELHI Read More »

Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection to Journalist Abhisar Sharma in Assam FIR

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection to Journalist Abhisar Sharma in Assam FIR Kerala High Court Rules Judges Must Personally View Obscene Video Evidence Before Conviction Gujarat HC Lawyers Meet CJI Over Transfer Proposal of Justice Sandeep Bhatt Bombay High Court Restrains Sanjay Nirupam from Making Communal Remarks Against Slum Developer Ankita Bhati v. Dev Raj Singh Bhati – Supreme Court Reiterates Wife’s Convenience Paramount in Transfer of Matrimonial Cases (2023) Presidential Reference on Deadlines for Governors: Supreme Court Hearing Enters Day 5 LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CHAMBERS FOR JUSTICE, DELHI LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT AVNEESH ARPUTHAM LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT RISHABH GANDHI AND ADVOCATES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT UTKRISHTHA LAW OFFICES Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection to Journalist Abhisar Sharma in Assam FIR Kashak Agarwala 29 AUG 2025 The Supreme Court of India grants journalist Abhisar Sharma four-week interim protection against arrest in Assam over a YouTube video, while directing him to challenge the FIR before the Gauhati High Court. Interim Protection by Supreme Court On Thursday, a Bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and N. Kotiswar Singh granted Abhisar Sharma a four-week interim protection against arrest in connection with a FIR filed over a YouTube video criticizing the Assam government. The Court declined to quash the FIR itself, clarifying that Sharma must approach the Gauhati High Court to challenge it. The Bench acknowledged his role as a journalist and stated that the protection was to ensure he could seek judicial relief without facing immediate arrest. FIR and Charges Invoked The FIR was registered on 21 August 2025, after Sharma criticized the Assam government for allotting 3,000 bighas of tribal land to a private entity and accused it of divisive politics. Charges under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) included: Section 152 BNS: Threatening sovereignty of the state Section 196 BNS: Encouragement of hostility between groups Section 197 BNS: Statements prejudicial to national integration The FIR alleged that Sharma mocked the government, ridiculed Ram Rajya, and encouraged communal hatred, negatively impacting national cohesion. Court Proceedings and Submissions Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal argued to annul the FIR and prevent multiple complaints arising from the same video. He emphasized the need for uniformity in prosecuting such cases. Justice Sundresh noted that even if the Supreme Court entertained the plea, the State could file another FIR, making the High Court the appropriate forum for challenging the FIR. The Bench granted interim protection for four weeks to allow Sharma to seek relief before the Gauhati High Court. Constitutional Challenge to Section 152 BNS Sharma contended that Section 152 BNS was unconstitutional, as it was a reform of the repealed Section 124A IPC, and argued that it is vague and overly broad, allowing potential misuse against critics. The petition invoked Articles 14, 19(1)(a), and 21 of the Constitution of India, claiming violations of equality, freedom of speech, and due process. The Supreme Court issued notice to the Central Government, linking Sharma’s challenge to other similar cases pending before the Court. Petition Grounds The petition argued that: Sharma’s video criticism was factual and verifiable, containing no incitement to violence. Freedom of speech includes criticism of government policies and political decisions. Prosecution under Section 152 BNS for journalistic reporting, including potential life imprisonment, is disproportionate and unconstitutional. Next Steps Interim protection: Four weeks for Sharma to approach the Gauhati High Court to quash the FIR. Constitutional challenge: Section 152 BNS case to be considered by the Supreme Court. Representation: Advocate Sumeer Sodhi filed the petition on behalf of Sharma. This ruling highlights press freedom, proportionality in criminal law, and safeguards for journalists under India’s democratic framework. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sadalaw. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection to Journalist Abhisar Sharma in Assam FIR Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Kerala High Court Rules Judges Must Personally View Obscene Video Evidence Before Conviction Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Gujarat HC Lawyers Meet CJI Over Transfer Proposal of Justice Sandeep Bhatt Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Grants Interim Protection to Journalist Abhisar Sharma in Assam FIR Read More »

Kerala High Court Rules Judges Must Personally View Obscene Video Evidence Before Conviction

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Kerala High Court Rules Judges Must Personally View Obscene Video Evidence Before Conviction Gujarat HC Lawyers Meet CJI Over Transfer Proposal of Justice Sandeep Bhatt Bombay High Court Restrains Sanjay Nirupam from Making Communal Remarks Against Slum Developer Ankita Bhati v. Dev Raj Singh Bhati – Supreme Court Reiterates Wife’s Convenience Paramount in Transfer of Matrimonial Cases (2023) Presidential Reference on Deadlines for Governors: Supreme Court Hearing Enters Day 5 LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CHAMBERS FOR JUSTICE, DELHI LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT AVNEESH ARPUTHAM LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT RISHABH GANDHI AND ADVOCATES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT UTKRISHTHA LAW OFFICES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT DEEPAK SINGH THAKUR & ASSOCIATES Kerala High Court Rules Judges Must Personally View Obscene Video Evidence Before Conviction Kashak Agarwala 29 AUG 2025 The Kerala High Court rules that trial courts cannot convict individuals for distributing obscene material without personally verifying video evidence, strengthening due process in obscenity cases under Section 292 IPC. Court Mandates Direct Judicial Verification The Kerala High Court has ruled that trial courts must personally watch and analyze video evidence before finding a person guilty of distributing obscene content. The judgment emphasizes that a video must meet the legal definition of obscenity and cannot be assessed solely based on witness testimony or police reports. Justice Kauser Edappagath allowed a criminal revision petition filed by Harikumar, a video shop operator from Kottayam, who was previously convicted for renting out allegedly obscene video cassettes. Background of the Case Incident: In the 1990s, authorities seized ten video cassettes from Harikumar’s video shop, claiming they contained obscene material. Charges: Filed under Section 292(2)(a), (c), and (d) of the Indian Penal Code, which addresses the sale, hire, distribution, and exhibition of obscene content. Trial Court Verdict: Two years imprisonment and a fine of ₹2,000. On appeal, the sentence was reduced to one year, but the conviction was upheld. Petitioner’s Claim: Harikumar argued the trial court never personally viewed the cassettes, relying instead on witness testimony and police reports. High Court Findings The Kerala High Court ruled: Primary evidence under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, like video cassettes, must be personally inspected by the trial judge. Viewing by the court is required to verify that the content is lascivious or obscene. Witness testimony and police reports may supplement evidence but cannot replace direct judicial examination. Justice Edappagath stressed that obscenity is a legal conclusion, not subjective hearsay, and requires direct contact with the material to determine whether it could deprave or corrupt viewers. Legal Principle on Obscenity Obscenity prosecutions demand strict adherence to evidentiary standards. Courts must personally verify content before a conviction under Section 292 IPC. The ruling ensures due process, protecting defendants against convictions based solely on indirect evidence. Outcome of the Case The High Court allowed Harikumar’s criminal revision petition. Conviction and sentence were nullified. Representation: Advocate M.P. Madhavankutty for the petitioner; Public Prosecutor Sangeetha Raj N.R. for the State. Significance This ruling reinforces that: Judicial examination is essential in obscenity cases. Convictions cannot rely solely on hearsay or official evaluation. It safeguards free speech, morality, and proper evidentiary procedure in criminal prosecutions. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sadalaw. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Kerala High Court Rules Judges Must Personally View Obscene Video Evidence Before Conviction Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Gujarat HC Lawyers Meet CJI Over Transfer Proposal of Justice Sandeep Bhatt Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Bombay High Court Restrains Sanjay Nirupam from Making Communal Remarks Against Slum Developer Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Kerala High Court Rules Judges Must Personally View Obscene Video Evidence Before Conviction Read More »

Gujarat HC Lawyers Meet CJI Over Transfer Proposal of Justice Sandeep Bhatt

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Gujarat HC Lawyers Meet CJI Over Transfer Proposal of Justice Sandeep Bhatt Bombay High Court Restrains Sanjay Nirupam from Making Communal Remarks Against Slum Developer Ankita Bhati v. Dev Raj Singh Bhati – Supreme Court Reiterates Wife’s Convenience Paramount in Transfer of Matrimonial Cases (2023) Presidential Reference on Deadlines for Governors: Supreme Court Hearing Enters Day 5 LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CHAMBERS FOR JUSTICE, DELHI LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT AVNEESH ARPUTHAM LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT RISHABH GANDHI AND ADVOCATES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT UTKRISHTHA LAW OFFICES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT DEEPAK SINGH THAKUR & ASSOCIATES Mangilal v. State of Madhya Pradesh – Supreme Court Acquittal for Non-Compliance with Section 52A NDPS Act (2023) Gujarat HC Lawyers Meet CJI Over Transfer Proposal of Justice Sandeep Bhatt Kashak Agarwala 29 AUG 2025 A delegation of Gujarat High Court lawyers met Chief Justice of India BR Gavai and Justice Surya Kant opposing the transfer of Justice Sandeep N. Bhatt to Madhya Pradesh High Court, citing his integrity and judicial contributions. GHCAA Delegation Meets CJI On Thursday, a delegation of the Gujarat High Court Advocates Association (GHCAA) met CJI BR Gavai and Justice Surya Kant to present a representation opposing the transfer of Justice Sandeep N. Bhatt to the Madhya Pradesh High Court. Since 26 August 2025, GHCAA has been on strike over the transfer proposal, which was approved by the Supreme Court Collegium during its meetings on 25–26 August 2025. Composition of the Delegation The GHCAA formed a special committee to advocate for the Bar’s interests. The delegation included: Brijesh J. Trivedi, GHCAA President Senior Advocate Asim Pandya Advocates Hardik Brahmbhatt, Babubhai Mangukiya, Dipen Dave, and Bhargav Bhatt The lawyers expressed their opposition to the transfer, emphasizing Justice Bhatt’s fairness, diligence, and integrity. Representation in Favor of Justice Bhatt The written representation highlighted Justice Bhatt’s judicial record: Promoted as a Judge in October 2021 Adjudicated approximately 19,000 cases over four years Maintained an industrious and respected presence in the Gujarat judiciary The Bar praised his integrity, stating it is “above suspicion,” and emphasized the respect he commands among his peers. Allegations Against the High Court Administration The representation criticized administrative practices under Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal, suggesting that Justice Bhatt’s transfer might be linked to administrative friction. Key examples included: Registrar AT Ukrani failed to return 15 case files to a Surat court within seven months (2019). Justice Bhatt questioned this delay. Following his order, the Chief Justice changed Justice Bhatt’s roster, moving him to a Division Bench under a senior judge, despite GHCAA’s objections. Further Controversies Justice Bhatt later handled service matter cases, where he noted deficiencies, including the failure to install CCTV cameras in judiciary departments. Some of his observations were expunged by a Division Bench. The Bar emphasized that Justice Bhatt never overstepped legal boundaries, maintaining adherence to judicial norms. Background of Justice Bhatt Education: Science degree from Kotak Science College, Rajkot (1988); Law degree (1992) Legal Career: Enrolled as advocate with Bar Council of Gujarat in 1993; practiced at Rajkot District Court with his father N.S. Bhatt Gujarat High Court: Joined in 1994 under late Girishbhai D. Bhatt; elevated to Judge in October 2021 after nearly 30 years in law Concerns Over the Transfer Process The GHCAA argued that judge transfers should not be routine. In Justice Bhatt’s case, they warned that the transfer could be perceived as stigmatic, potentially harming both his reputation and the judiciary’s credibility. The delegation could not meet all members of the Collegium but sent additional copies of the representation for consideration. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sadalaw. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Gujarat HC Lawyers Meet CJI Over Transfer Proposal of Justice Sandeep Bhatt Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Bombay High Court Restrains Sanjay Nirupam from Making Communal Remarks Against Slum Developer Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Presidential Reference on Deadlines for Governors: Supreme Court Hearing Enters Day 5 Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Gujarat HC Lawyers Meet CJI Over Transfer Proposal of Justice Sandeep Bhatt Read More »

Bombay High Court Restrains Sanjay Nirupam from Making Communal Remarks Against Slum Developer

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Bombay High Court Restrains Sanjay Nirupam from Making Communal Remarks Against Slum Developer Ankita Bhati v. Dev Raj Singh Bhati – Supreme Court Reiterates Wife’s Convenience Paramount in Transfer of Matrimonial Cases (2023) Presidential Reference on Deadlines for Governors: Supreme Court Hearing Enters Day 5 LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CHAMBERS FOR JUSTICE, DELHI LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT AVNEESH ARPUTHAM LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT RISHABH GANDHI AND ADVOCATES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT UTKRISHTHA LAW OFFICES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT DEEPAK SINGH THAKUR & ASSOCIATES Mangilal v. State of Madhya Pradesh – Supreme Court Acquittal for Non-Compliance with Section 52A NDPS Act (2023) Trump Signs Sweeping Economic Orders: Tariffs, Spending Cuts, and Immigration Clampdown Bombay High Court Restrains Sanjay Nirupam from Making Communal Remarks Against Slum Developer Kashak Agarwala 29 AUG 2025 The Bombay High Court issues interim relief to Mumbai-based developer Chandiwala Enterprises, restraining Sanjay Nirupam from making defamatory communal remarks related to slum redevelopment. Temporary Relief to Developer The Bombay High Court has issued an interim injunction against Sanjay Nirupam, a leader of the Shiv Sena (Eknath Shinde faction) and former Congress Member of Parliament (MP) from Mumbai. Nirupam had allegedly made communal remarks defaming Chandiwala Enterprises, a Mumbai-based developer. The interim order, delivered by Justice R.I. Chagla, came in response to a plea filed by the developer alleging defamation and communal targeting. Accusations Against the Developer The dispute arose from the redevelopment of Shree Shankar Society in Malad, Mumbai. Nirupam had claimed in a letter dated 20 February 2025 and in subsequent press conferences that Muslim developers were illegally registering slums in Muslim names with the assistance of Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) officials. Chandiwala Enterprises argued that these statements were: Factually baseless. Communal in nature. Intended to damage the developer’s reputation and disrupt the redevelopment project. Court’s Prima Facie Findings Justice Chagla observed that the allegations were completely false. The Court noted that only 7 out of 67 residents of Shree Shankar Society were Muslim. Therefore, the claim that Muslim developers were involved in a secret campaign, colluding with SRA officials, was prima facie false. Pre-Trial Conduct of Defendant The Court highlighted that Nirupam had ignored successive legal notices in the defamation case. Notices sent to his home were reportedly torn and returned, and he failed to respond to communications via email or WhatsApp. An advocate eventually appeared on Nirupam’s behalf to request time to record a vakalatnama. Based on these facts, the Court held that a prima facie case against Nirupam was established. Operative Portion of the Order The interim order stated: “The Defendant is restrained, by means of temporary injunction, from making or publishing any defamatory, slanderous, or libelous statements as contained in the documents annexed at Exh.A to the Affidavit dated 9th August 2025.” The Court allowed Nirupam one week to file a vakalatnama and two weeks to submit a formal reply to the defamation suit. Next Hearing and Legal Representation The next hearing is scheduled for 10 September 2025. Chandiwala Enterprises was represented by Senior Advocate Janak Dwarkades, along with advocates Cherag Balsara, Yogesh Patil, and Sanjeev Singh, instructed by Ritesh Singh. Sanjay Nirupam was represented by advocate Mahesh B. Gupte. The Court’s order emphasizes protection against communal defamation while safeguarding the reputation of developers engaged in Mumbai’s slum redevelopment projects. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sadalaw. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Bombay High Court Restrains Sanjay Nirupam from Making Communal Remarks Against Slum Developer Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Presidential Reference on Deadlines for Governors: Supreme Court Hearing Enters Day 5 Sadalaw • August 29, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Trump Signs Sweeping Economic Orders: Tariffs, Spending Cuts, and Immigration Clampdown Sadalaw • August 28, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Bombay High Court Restrains Sanjay Nirupam from Making Communal Remarks Against Slum Developer Read More »

Get A Quote
Get A Quote