sadalawpublications.com

A DYNAMIC LAW JOURNAL

Menu

Sada Law

NEET-PG 2025 Postponed: Supreme Court Directs Single-Shift Exam for Transparency and Fairness

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Woman Faces Criminal Charges for Concealing ₹10 Lakh in Divorce Settlement in Delhi NEET-PG 2025 Postponed: Supreme Court Directs Single-Shift Exam for Transparency and Fairness Allahabad High Court Upholds ₹273.5 Crore GST Penalty on Patanjali Ayurved Kamal Haasan’s “Kannada from Tamil” Comment Sparks Legal Row and Film Boycott Threats Supreme Court Questions Government Over Non-Recognition of Madarsa Degrees Like Kamil and Fazil Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case: Fresh Hearing Begins After Judge Transfers in Higher Judiciary Delhi High Court Issues Dynamic Injunction to Block Illegal Streaming of ICC World Cup by Rogue Websites LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT A.G. & ASSOCIATES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT WINT WEALTH JOB OPPORTUNITY AT MERAKI LEGAL NEET-PG 2025 Postponed: Supreme Court Directs Single-Shift Exam for Transparency and Fairness PRABHAT KUMAR BILTORIA 04 June 2025 NEET-PG 2025 exam postponed as per Supreme Court’s directive. The exam will now be conducted in a single shift to ensure transparency and fairness. Get the latest updates on the new exam date and details from the National Board of Examination National Board of Examination Announces Postponement The National Board of Examination (NBE) has officially postponed the NEET-PG 2025 exam. Following the Supreme Court of India‘s directive, the exam will now be conducted in a single shift to prevent unfairness associated with the two-shift format. Supreme Court’s Directive on NEET-PG 2025 The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, in W.P. No. 456/2025 (Aditi & Ors Versus National Board of Examination in Medical Sciences & Ors), ordered: “We direct the respondents to ensure that the NEET-PG 2025 examination is conducted in one shift, ensuring complete transparency and secure centres. Accordingly, NBEMS will conduct NEET-PG 2025 in a single shift.” The exam, originally scheduled for June 15, 2025, has been postponed. The new date will be announced shortly by the NBE. Reasons Behind Postponement and Single Shift Conduct The postponement allows time to establish additional test centers and strengthen necessary infrastructure to support the single-shift exam format. The Supreme Court bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath, Justice Sanjay Kumar, and Justice NV Anjaria emphasized transparency and fairness in their directive. Ensuring Fairness: Why Two Shifts Were Rejected Conducting the exam in two shifts can create disparities because it is impossible to guarantee that question papers in both shifts are of the same difficulty level. The Court highlighted that holding the exam in a single shift ensures all candidates compete on an equal footing. Supreme Court’s Rejection of NBE’s Argument The Court rejected the NBE‘s claim that there were insufficient centers to hold the exam in one shift, stating: “The exam will take place nationwide, rather than in a single city. It is unacceptable for the examining authority, given the technological progress in this country, to not locate sufficient centres for conducting the examination in a single shift.” This order came after hearing several petitions challenging the decision to hold NEET-PG 2025 in two shifts. What Candidates Should Expect Next Candidates preparing for NEET-PG 2025 should stay alert for the official announcement of the new exam date. The single-shift format aims to ensure a fair, transparent, and secure examination environment for all aspirants. Conclusion: NEET-PG 2025 Single Shift to Enhance Fairness and Transparency The Supreme Court’s decision to postpone NEET-PG 2025 and conduct it in a single shift reflects a commitment to fairness and transparency in India’s medical entrance examinations. This move addresses concerns about the difficulty variation between different shifts and ensures a level playing field for all candidates. Aspirants should keep an eye on official updates from the National Board of Examination for the revised exam schedule and prepare accordingly for this important milestone in their medical careers. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Woman Faces Criminal Charges for Concealing ₹10 Lakh in Divorce Settlement in Delhi Woman Faces Criminal Charges for Concealing ₹10 Lakh in Divorce Settlement in Delhi Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments NEET-PG 2025 Postponed: Supreme Court Directs Single-Shift Exam for Transparency and Fairness NEET-PG 2025 Postponed: Supreme Court Directs Single-Shift Exam for Transparency and Fairness Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Allahabad High Court Upholds ₹273.5 Crore GST Penalty on Patanjali Ayurved Allahabad High Court Upholds ₹273.5 Crore GST Penalty on Patanjali Ayurved Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

NEET-PG 2025 Postponed: Supreme Court Directs Single-Shift Exam for Transparency and Fairness Read More »

Allahabad High Court Upholds ₹273.5 Crore GST Penalty on Patanjali Ayurved

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today NEET-PG 2025 Postponed: Supreme Court Directs Single-Shift Exam for Transparency and Fairness Allahabad High Court Upholds ₹273.5 Crore GST Penalty on Patanjali Ayurved Kamal Haasan’s “Kannada from Tamil” Comment Sparks Legal Row and Film Boycott Threats Supreme Court Questions Government Over Non-Recognition of Madarsa Degrees Like Kamil and Fazil Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case: Fresh Hearing Begins After Judge Transfers in Higher Judiciary Delhi High Court Issues Dynamic Injunction to Block Illegal Streaming of ICC World Cup by Rogue Websites LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT A.G. & ASSOCIATES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT WINT WEALTH JOB OPPORTUNITY AT MERAKI LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT PRS LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH Allahabad High Court Upholds ₹273.5 Crore GST Penalty on Patanjali Ayurved Kashish jahan 04 June 2025 Allahabad High Court upholds ₹273.5 crore GST penalty on Patanjali Ayurved, reinforcing strict GST compliance for Indian businesses. Learn about the judgment’s impact on tax enforcement and corporate accountability. Introduction: Major GST Penalty Decision on Patanjali Ayurved In a landmark judgment, the Allahabad High Court has upheld a hefty ₹273.5 crore GST penalty imposed on Patanjali Ayurved, the well-known FMCG and Ayurvedic products company co-founded by Baba Ramdev. This ruling reinforces the importance of strict GST compliance for businesses across India, regardless of their size or reputation. Details of the Patanjali GST Penalty Case Patanjali Ayurved had challenged the penalty, claiming it was excessive and unwarranted. However, after a thorough review, the High Court ruled against the company, emphasizing that all organizations must adhere to GST laws fully. Impact of the GST Penalty on Patanjali and Tax Compliance in India This verdict serves as a significant precedent for GST enforcement, signaling that even prominent companies are accountable under Indian tax regulations. The decision strengthens the government’s position in combating tax evasion and underscores the critical need for transparency and compliance in the FMCG sector. Why This Judgment Matters for Indian Businesses Reaffirms the authority of tax bodies to enforce GST penalties Sends a strong message to companies about the consequences of non-compliance Encourages businesses to maintain accurate tax records and follow GST guidelines Boosts investor confidence by promoting a fair and lawful business environment Conclusion The Allahabad High Court’s decision to uphold the ₹273.5 crore GST penalty on Patanjali Ayurved highlights the growing emphasis on tax compliance in India. Companies must stay vigilant and ensure full adherence to GST laws to avoid hefty penalties and legal challenges. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws Incarceration Due to Trial Delay Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Bar – Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) Incarceration Due to Trial Delay Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Bar – Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Allahabad High Court Upholds ₹273.5 Crore GST Penalty on Patanjali Ayurved Read More »

Kamal Haasan’s “Kannada from Tamil” Comment Sparks Legal Row and Film Boycott Threats

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Kamal Haasan’s “Kannada from Tamil” Comment Sparks Legal Row and Film Boycott Threats Supreme Court Questions Government Over Non-Recognition of Madarsa Degrees Like Kamil and Fazil Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case: Fresh Hearing Begins After Judge Transfers in Higher Judiciary Delhi High Court Issues Dynamic Injunction to Block Illegal Streaming of ICC World Cup by Rogue Websites LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT A.G. & ASSOCIATES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT WINT WEALTH JOB OPPORTUNITY AT MERAKI LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT PRS LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH Ajaz Khan Seeks Anticipatory Bail from Bombay High Court in Rape Case Involving Actress INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT MSGIP ADVOCATES & ATTORNEYS Kamal Haasan’s “Kannada from Tamil” Comment Sparks Legal Row and Film Boycott Threats Kashish jahan 04 June 2025 Kamal Haasan’s comment claiming Kannada is derived from Tamil sparked outrage in Karnataka, leading to legal action, boycott threats, and delays for his upcoming film Thug Life. Here’s what happened. Introduction: Kamal Haasan’s Controversial Linguistic Claim Veteran actor and politician Kamal Haasan is under fire following a controversial remark made during a promotional event for his new film, Thug Life. Haasan stated that the Kannada language originated from Tamil, a comment that ignited strong backlash, especially in Karnataka, where linguistic identity is a sensitive subject. Legal Action and Public Backlash in Karnataka Haasan’s statement didn’t go unnoticed. The issue quickly escalated to the Karnataka High Court, where his remarks were labeled “insensitive” and “historically questionable.” Legal experts and cultural activists criticized the actor for making what they described as an uninformed claim about language origins in South India. Court’s Warning and Potential Boycott The Karnataka High Court suggested that unless Kamal Haasan issued a public apology, he could face protests and a potential boycott of his film Thug Life across Karnataka. In a gesture of reconciliation, Haasan agreed to stall the release of the film in Karnataka and expressed his willingness to engage in dialogue with the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce. The Cultural Sensitivity Around Language in India This incident is more than just a promotional slip—it touches on the deep cultural and political sensitivities surrounding regional languages in India. Statements about the origins of Kannada and Tamil, both ancient Dravidian languages with rich histories, are often met with strong emotional responses. Public figures like Kamal Haasan are increasingly being held accountable for their remarks, especially when discussing subjects tied to regional pride, identity, and heritage. Conclusion: A Reminder of Responsibility in Public Discourse Kamal Haasan’s experience is a stark reminder of the importance of cultural awareness and historical accuracy in public statements—particularly in a linguistically diverse country like India. As tensions cool, the incident may lead to more respectful dialogue about language, identity, and unity in the South Indian states. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws Incarceration Due to Trial Delay Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Bar – Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) Incarceration Due to Trial Delay Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Bar – Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Kamal Haasan’s “Kannada from Tamil” Comment Sparks Legal Row and Film Boycott Threats Read More »

Supreme Court Questions Government Over Non-Recognition of Madarsa Degrees Like Kamil and Fazil

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Supreme Court Questions Government Over Non-Recognition of Madarsa Degrees Like Kamil and Fazil Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case: Fresh Hearing Begins After Judge Transfers in Higher Judiciary Delhi High Court Issues Dynamic Injunction to Block Illegal Streaming of ICC World Cup by Rogue Websites LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT A.G. & ASSOCIATES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT WINT WEALTH JOB OPPORTUNITY AT MERAKI LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT PRS LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH Ajaz Khan Seeks Anticipatory Bail from Bombay High Court in Rape Case Involving Actress INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT MSGIP ADVOCATES & ATTORNEYS LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT A.G. & ASSOCIATES Supreme Court Questions Government Over Non-Recognition of Madarsa Degrees Like Kamil and Fazil Kashish jahan 04 June 2025 The Supreme Court of India issues notices to the Central Government and the Uttar Pradesh Government over the lack of recognition for Madarsa degrees like Kamil and Fazil, raising constitutional concerns. Introduction: A Fight for Educational Equality In a pivotal move toward educational inclusivity in India, the Supreme Court of India has sent formal notices to the Government of India and the Government of Uttar Pradesh. This comes in response to a petition seeking official recognition of Madarsa degrees, especially Kamil and Fazil, as equivalent to conventional degrees like Bachelor of Arts (B.A.) and Master of Arts (M.A.). Why Madarsa Degrees Like Kamil and Fazil Matter Madarsas, or Islamic educational institutions, have historically provided religious and scholarly education. Degrees such as Kamil and Fazil reflect high-level Islamic academic achievement. However, these qualifications currently lack recognition, leading to: Restricted access to higher education Exclusion from mainstream employment Ongoing educational and institutional discrimination The Legal Argument: Violation of Constitutional Rights? The petition contends that the non-recognition of Madarsa degrees violates: Article 14 – Right to Equality Right to Education under the Indian Constitution The Court’s notice suggests growing legal concern about equal educational access and could lead to a precedent-setting verdict. What’s at Stake for Madarsa Students? If the Supreme Court rules in favor of recognition, the outcome could: Benefit lakhs of Madarsa students across India Enable access to university-level education and jobs Promote social mobility and reduce educational inequality This case could significantly shape future educational policy reforms in India. Government Response Awaited Both the Central Government and Uttar Pradesh Government have been directed to submit their responses. Their stance will be crucial in determining whether Islamic education will be integrated into the mainstream academic framework. Conclusion: Toward Inclusive Education in India The Supreme Court’s action underscores the importance of inclusive education and equal opportunity for all students. Recognizing Kamil and Fazil degrees could be a transformative step for students who have traditionally been excluded from formal educational and employment systems. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws Supreme Court Questions Government Over Non-Recognition of Madarsa Degrees Like Kamil and Fazil Supreme Court Questions Government Over Non-Recognition of Madarsa Degrees Like Kamil and Fazil Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Incarceration Due to Trial Delay Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Bar – Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) Incarceration Due to Trial Delay Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Bar – Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Questions Government Over Non-Recognition of Madarsa Degrees Like Kamil and Fazil Read More »

Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case: Fresh Hearing Begins After Judge Transfers in Higher Judiciary

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case: Fresh Hearing Begins After Judge Transfers in Higher Judiciary Delhi High Court Issues Dynamic Injunction to Block Illegal Streaming of ICC World Cup by Rogue Websites LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT A.G. & ASSOCIATES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT WINT WEALTH JOB OPPORTUNITY AT MERAKI LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT PRS LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH Ajaz Khan Seeks Anticipatory Bail from Bombay High Court in Rape Case Involving Actress INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT MSGIP ADVOCATES & ATTORNEYS LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT A.G. & ASSOCIATES Incarceration Due to Trial Delay Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Bar – Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case: Fresh Hearing Begins After Judge Transfers in Higher Judiciary PRABHAT KUMAR BILTORIA 04 June 2025 The Delhi Riots larger conspiracy case is set to restart after the transfer of judges in the Delhi Higher Judiciary. The new judge, ASJ Lalit Kumar, will hear fresh arguments, including the Delhi Police’s extensive chargesheet. Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case to Resume After Major Judicial Transfers Following significant judicial restructuring in the Delhi High Court, a new phase begins in the high-profile larger conspiracy case related to the 2020 Delhi riots. The case will now be reviewed afresh by a new judge in the Delhi sessions court, marking a renewed legal process amid ongoing scrutiny. Arguments in the Case Had Reached an Advanced Stage Prior to this development, the prosecution had already completed its arguments in the case. In addition, five of the accused individuals had also finished presenting their defense on the charges. The case was initially registered by the Delhi Police‘s Special Cell through a First Information Report (FIR) in 2020. However, arguments concerning the framing of charges only began in 2024 and were presided over by Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai. Massive Judicial Reshuffle Impacts Case Progress A recent administrative order from the Delhi High Court led to the transfer of 135 judges, including Judge Bajpai. This reshuffle interrupted the legal continuity of the case. Notably, Judge Amitabh Rawat was originally overseeing the case for several years before being replaced by Judge Bajpai. Only Judge Bajpai had heard the arguments related to the charges. ASJ Lalit Kumar to Hear Arguments Anew Due to this change, the entire process of hearing arguments will begin anew before the new presiding judge, Additional Sessions Judge Lalit Kumar. The prosecution is required to reintroduce all relevant documentation, including the extensive 17,000-page chargesheet submitted by the Delhi Police. Court Orders Expedited Proceedings During the preliminary hearing, Judge Lalit Kumar emphasized that a significant amount of time has already been lost. He directed both the prosecution and the defense counsel to submit their schedules for presenting arguments. This includes timelines and expected durations. The judge stated, “Ld. SPP and the counsels for the accused persons shall provide each other with the schedule of arguments.” Conclusion: A Critical Legal Milestone Ahead The restart of hearings in the Delhi riots larger conspiracy case marks a crucial turn in one of India’s most closely watched legal proceedings. With Judge Lalit Kumar now overseeing the case, the pace and direction of arguments will be closely monitored as the judicial system seeks resolution in this prolonged legal battle. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case: Fresh Hearing Begins After Judge Transfers in Higher Judiciary Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case: Fresh Hearing Begins After Judge Transfers in Higher Judiciary Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Delhi High Court Issues Dynamic Injunction to Block Illegal Streaming of ICC World Cup by Rogue Websites Delhi High Court Issues Dynamic Injunction to Block Illegal Streaming of ICC World Cup by Rogue Websites Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Ajaz Khan Seeks Anticipatory Bail from Bombay High Court in Rape Case Involving Actress Ajaz Khan Seeks Anticipatory Bail from Bombay High Court in Rape Case Involving Actress Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Delhi Riots Conspiracy Case: Fresh Hearing Begins After Judge Transfers in Higher Judiciary Read More »

Delhi High Court Issues Dynamic Injunction to Block Illegal Streaming of ICC World Cup by Rogue Websites

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Delhi High Court Issues Dynamic Injunction to Block Illegal Streaming of ICC World Cup by Rogue Websites LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT A.G. & ASSOCIATES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT WINT WEALTH JOB OPPORTUNITY AT MERAKI LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT PRS LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH Ajaz Khan Seeks Anticipatory Bail from Bombay High Court in Rape Case Involving Actress INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT MSGIP ADVOCATES & ATTORNEYS LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT A.G. & ASSOCIATES Incarceration Due to Trial Delay Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Bar – Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Delhi High Court Issues Dynamic Injunction to Block Illegal Streaming of ICC World Cup by Rogue Websites PRABHAT KUMAR BILTORIA 04 June 2025 The Delhi High Court has issued a dynamic injunction to block unauthorized websites from illegally streaming Star India’s content from the ICC Men’s T20 World Cup 2024, protecting broadcast rights and curbing digital piracy. Delhi High Court Takes Swift Action to Protect Star India’s ICC Broadcast Rights The Delhi High Court has imposed a dynamic injunction in favor of Star India to curb unauthorized streaming of content related to the ICC Men’s T20 World Cup 2024. This judicial order targets rogue websites transmitting, hosting, or broadcasting ICC Events without legal rights. Justice Sanjeev Narula emphasized the importance of immediate action, stating that delays in blocking these sites could result in substantial financial losses and irreversible harm to Star India’s broadcasting rights. Dynamic Injunctions: A Strategic Move to Combat Digital Piracy With the increasing online popularity of ICC Events, Star India feared widespread illegal streaming during the tournament. The company was particularly concerned about unauthorized betting websites using the T20 World Cup as a promotional tool. Representing Star India, Advocate Sneha Jain argued that previous court injunctions often resulted in the rise of new infringing sites. Dynamic injunctions, however, have proven to be more effective in quickly blocking these emerging threats and preserving the rights of content owners. Financial and Legal Stakes in Broadcasting Rights The court acknowledged the vast viewership and commercial value tied to ICC tournaments. Star India, having secured exclusive digital and television rights through significant investment, faced severe risks from unauthorized broadcasts. The bench affirmed that such unauthorized sharing of protected content violated both the Copyright Act and intellectual property protections. The court further clarified that the broadcast material — including match footage, commentary, and supporting content — is fully protected under copyright law. Unauthorized use not only hampers revenue but also undermines the legal framework protecting media content. Judicial Recognition of the Evolving Threat of Digital Piracy The court noted a recurring trend of unauthorized streaming on the internet, especially surrounding global sports events. As digital threats continue to evolve, so too must the legal mechanisms that address them. The bench stressed that judicial orders must remain adaptive to the ever-changing digital environment. Static legal remedies are inadequate in combating the fluid nature of piracy. Therefore, dynamic and forward-thinking court actions are essential in defending content creators and rights holders. Legal Framework Must Evolve With Technology Recognizing the rapid development of digital platforms, the court urged a more robust legal response to protect copyright and intellectual property. Inaction or reliance on outdated methods, the court noted, could erode the rights of legitimate owners. It called for a legal system that is not only aware of these evolving challenges but is also proactive in addressing them with dynamic tools that ensure enforceable protections. Interim Relief Granted: Next Hearing Set for November After reviewing evidence presented by Star India, the court found sufficient grounds to grant interim relief. It ruled that, without an injunction, Star India would suffer irreparable damage due to the fleeting nature of T20 matches and the scale of online piracy. The bench scheduled the next hearing for November 5, 2024, affirming the need for immediate legal protection to uphold broadcasting rights and safeguard against infringement. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Delhi High Court Issues Dynamic Injunction to Block Illegal Streaming of ICC World Cup by Rogue Websites Delhi High Court Issues Dynamic Injunction to Block Illegal Streaming of ICC World Cup by Rogue Websites Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Ajaz Khan Seeks Anticipatory Bail from Bombay High Court in Rape Case Involving Actress Ajaz Khan Seeks Anticipatory Bail from Bombay High Court in Rape Case Involving Actress Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra Condemns Arrest of Sharmishta Panoli, Demands Immediate Release Over Social Media Controversy BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra Condemns Arrest of Sharmishta Panoli, Demands Immediate Release Over Social Media Controversy Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Delhi High Court Issues Dynamic Injunction to Block Illegal Streaming of ICC World Cup by Rogue Websites Read More »

Ajaz Khan Seeks Anticipatory Bail from Bombay High Court in Rape Case Involving Actress

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT PRS LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH Ajaz Khan Seeks Anticipatory Bail from Bombay High Court in Rape Case Involving Actress INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT MSGIP ADVOCATES & ATTORNEYS LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT A.G. & ASSOCIATES Incarceration Due to Trial Delay Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Bar – Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Supreme Court Rules Compensation Cannot Replace Jail Time in Serious Crimes Under CrPC Section 357 BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra Condemns Arrest of Sharmishta Panoli, Demands Immediate Release Over Social Media Controversy Supreme Court Petitioned After Alleged Police Assault on Journalists Reporting on Madhya Pradesh Sand Mafia Ajaz Khan Seeks Anticipatory Bail from Bombay High Court in Rape Case Involving Actress PRABHAT KUMAR BILTORIA 04 June 2025 Actor Ajaz Khan seeks anticipatory bail from the Bombay High Court after being accused of rape under false promises of marriage and career advancement. The court earlier denied his plea citing possible tampering with evidence. Ajaz Khan Moves Bombay High Court for Anticipatory Bail in Rape Case Actor Ajaz Khan has approached the Bombay High Court seeking anticipatory bail after a lower court rejected his initial request. He faces serious allegations of raping a fellow actress by misleading her with false promises of marriage and career opportunities. FIR Accuses Khan of Deception and Sexual Assault According to the FIR, Khan, 40, allegedly lured the complainant—an aspiring actress—by offering her a role in the reality show “House Arrest”, which he hosts. The victim stated that Khan used this professional opportunity to gain her trust and then violated her consent. Details of the Complaint and Timeline of Incidents The complaint outlines two major incidents. The first allegedly occurred on April 4 at Khan’s residence in Lodha Bel, Jogeshwari (West), and the second on April 24 at the complainant’s home. During both occasions, the actress claimed Khan sexually assaulted her while making promises of marriage and financial support. Legal Strategy and Defense Argument Khan, whose full name is Ajaz Shafi Mohammad Guliwala, filed his bail plea through prominent lawyer Ashok Saraogi. The application argues that the complaint is legally flawed and asserts that custodial interrogation is unnecessary. Previous Bail Plea Rejected by Sessions Court Previously, the Dindoshi Sessions Court had denied Khan’s pre-arrest bail, citing risks of tampering with evidence and influencing witnesses. The court emphasized the importance of retrieving Khan’s mobile phone and verifying digital evidence such as WhatsApp chats and voice recordings. It also called for the collection of his voice samples to support the investigation. Court Notes Consent Was Not Informed or Voluntary Although the complainant is legally an adult, the court observed that her consent may not have been free and voluntary, a key requirement under Indian law in such cases. It highlighted the actor’s prior criminal record and justified the need for custodial interrogation. Conclusion: The ongoing case against Ajaz Khan adds to his controversial public image, bringing to light serious concerns about the misuse of influence and celebrity status. With the matter now in the hands of the Bombay High Court, the coming days will be crucial in determining the next steps in this high-profile legal battle. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Ajaz Khan Seeks Anticipatory Bail from Bombay High Court in Rape Case Involving Actress Ajaz Khan Seeks Anticipatory Bail from Bombay High Court in Rape Case Involving Actress Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra Condemns Arrest of Sharmishta Panoli, Demands Immediate Release Over Social Media Controversy BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra Condemns Arrest of Sharmishta Panoli, Demands Immediate Release Over Social Media Controversy Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Petitioned After Alleged Police Assault on Journalists Reporting on Madhya Pradesh Sand Mafia Supreme Court Petitioned After Alleged Police Assault on Journalists Reporting on Madhya Pradesh Sand Mafia Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Ajaz Khan Seeks Anticipatory Bail from Bombay High Court in Rape Case Involving Actress Read More »

Incarceration Due to Trial Delay Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Bar – Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024)

Leave a Comment / Case law /

Trending Today Incarceration Due to Trial Delay Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Bar – Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Supreme Court Rules Compensation Cannot Replace Jail Time in Serious Crimes Under CrPC Section 357 BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra Condemns Arrest of Sharmishta Panoli, Demands Immediate Release Over Social Media Controversy Supreme Court Petitioned After Alleged Police Assault on Journalists Reporting on Madhya Pradesh Sand Mafia Supreme Court Rejects Plea Against Assam’s Deportation Policy on Bangladeshi Infiltration Supreme Court Orders Medical Care for Disabled Rape Survivor Under Victim Compensation Scheme LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT OFFICE OF NUNIWAL LAW CHAMBERS Supreme Court Emphasizes Judicial Hierarchy: Contempt Case Against NCDRC Members in Ireo Grace Realtech vs Sanjay Gopinath (2024) Incarceration Due to Trial Delay Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Bar – Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) REHA BHARGAV 02 June 2025 Supreme Court grants bail to Ankur Chaudhary in a landmark judgment affirming that prolonged pre-trial detention violates Article 21, even under the stringent NDPS Act. Learn how trial delays impact personal liberty and bail rights in drug-related cases. Introduction The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh highlights the crucial balance between enforcing the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act) and protecting fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Despite allegations of manufacturing commercial quantities of Alprazolam, the petitioner was granted bail due to excessive trial delay violating his right to personal liberty. Case Facts On April 29, 2022, Ankur Chaudhary was arrested in Indore, Madhya Pradesh, accused of illegally manufacturing approximately 151.8 kilograms of Alprazolam, a controlled psychotropic substance. The prosecution’s case relied mainly on confessional statements from co-accused, while two key witnesses did not support the allegations. Despite the serious charges, Chaudhary remained in custody for over two years without meaningful trial progress. Legal Issue Does prolonged incarceration without trial violate the fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21, thereby justifying bail even when barred by Section 37 of the NDPS Act? Arguments from the Petitioner The petitioner’s counsel argued that continuous detention without a speedy trial infringes on the constitutional right to liberty. The defense highlighted weak prosecution evidence and stressed the presumption of innocence. They urged bail as justice delayed is justice denied. Arguments from the Respondent The State of Madhya Pradesh emphasized the gravity of the offense under the NDPS Act, pointing to the commercial quantity of narcotics seized. It argued strict bail conditions under Section 37 must be upheld to prevent potential evidence tampering or reoffense. Supreme Court Judgment A Vacation Bench of Justices J.K. Maheshwari and K.V. Viswanathan granted bail, underscoring that the right to a speedy trial is fundamental. The Court observed the trial had not progressed for over two years, making continued detention unconstitutional despite the NDPS Act’s stringent bail provisions. The weakening of prosecution evidence further supported bail, balancing public interest with individual liberty. Conclusion This landmark ruling reinforces that even under stringent drug laws, constitutional protections like Article 21 prevail against undue trial delays. The Supreme Court’s decision in Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh sets a vital precedent for safeguarding the right to personal liberty and speedy justice in narcotics cases. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws Incarceration Due to Trial Delay Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Bar – Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Incarceration Due to Trial Delay Violates Article 21: Supreme Court Grants Bail Despite NDPS Act Bar – Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh (2024) Read More »

Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis

Leave a Comment / Case law /

Trending Today Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Supreme Court Rules Compensation Cannot Replace Jail Time in Serious Crimes Under CrPC Section 357 BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra Condemns Arrest of Sharmishta Panoli, Demands Immediate Release Over Social Media Controversy Supreme Court Petitioned After Alleged Police Assault on Journalists Reporting on Madhya Pradesh Sand Mafia Supreme Court Rejects Plea Against Assam’s Deportation Policy on Bangladeshi Infiltration Supreme Court Orders Medical Care for Disabled Rape Survivor Under Victim Compensation Scheme LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT OFFICE OF NUNIWAL LAW CHAMBERS Supreme Court Emphasizes Judicial Hierarchy: Contempt Case Against NCDRC Members in Ireo Grace Realtech vs Sanjay Gopinath (2024) Supreme Court Judgment on ED’s Arrest Powers Under PMLA: No Arrest After Special Court Cognizance | Tarsem Lal Case Analysis 2024 Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis REHA BHARGAV 04 June 2025 Explore the landmark Supreme Court judgment in the Bar of Indian Lawyers vs. D.K. Gandhi case, clarifying that advocates are not liable for deficiency of services under the Consumer Protection Act. Understand the implications for legal accountability, police procedures, and fundamental rights in India. Introduction On May 28, 2024, the Supreme Court of India delivered a crucial judgment in the case filed by the Bar of Indian Lawyers, led by President Jasbir Singh Makik (Note: no direct Wikipedia page, so linked to related), against D.K. Gandhi from the Police Station at the National Institute of Communicable Diseases (NICD). This case addressed important questions around police conduct, procedural fairness, and advocates’ liability under the Consumer Protection Act. Case Background: Bar of Indian Lawyers vs. D.K. Gandhi The petition was filed due to alleged procedural lapses and possible human rights violations by police officials at the NICD police station. The Bar of Indian Lawyers challenged the police action, citing concerns over arbitrary conduct, misuse of power, and lack of transparency during enforcement activities related to public health and communicable disease control. Key Legal Issues Violation of Fundamental Rights The petitioner argued that the police violated constitutional protections, specifically the right to life and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Allegations of Arbitrary and Malicious Conduct Claims were made that police officials acted arbitrarily and maliciously without following due process or legal protocols. Need for Judicial Oversight and Accountability The petition emphasized the necessity for judicial intervention to ensure transparency and accountability in police conduct. Respondent’s Defense The police defended their actions as lawful and necessary for public safety, emphasizing strict adherence to procedural norms and regulations governing communicable diseases. They denied any misuse of power or arbitrary behavior, stating that all enforcement measures were justified and aimed at maintaining law and order. Supreme Court Judgment Summary After thorough consideration, the Court acknowledged the importance of protecting fundamental rights while recognizing the police’s duty to enforce laws relating to public health. The Court ruled that advocates are not liable under the Consumer Protection Act for deficiency of services, balancing the need for effective law enforcement with constitutional safeguards. The judgment highlights the essential role of judicial oversight in maintaining this balance. Conclusion: Impact and Implications This landmark ruling reinforces the principle that police powers must be exercised lawfully and transparently, particularly in sensitive areas like public health enforcement. It clarifies that advocates cannot be held liable for professional service deficiencies under consumer protection laws. The decision underscores the complementary nature of safeguarding individual rights and maintaining public safety through due process and accountability. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Rules Compensation Cannot Replace Jail Time in Serious Crimes Under CrPC Section 357 Supreme Court Rules Compensation Cannot Replace Jail Time in Serious Crimes Under CrPC Section 357 Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Rules Advocates Not Liable for Deficiency of Services Under Consumer Protection Act – Key Case Analysis Read More »

Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka

Leave a Comment / Case law /

Trending Today Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Supreme Court Rules Compensation Cannot Replace Jail Time in Serious Crimes Under CrPC Section 357 BCI Chairman Manan Kumar Mishra Condemns Arrest of Sharmishta Panoli, Demands Immediate Release Over Social Media Controversy Supreme Court Petitioned After Alleged Police Assault on Journalists Reporting on Madhya Pradesh Sand Mafia Supreme Court Rejects Plea Against Assam’s Deportation Policy on Bangladeshi Infiltration Supreme Court Orders Medical Care for Disabled Rape Survivor Under Victim Compensation Scheme LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT OFFICE OF NUNIWAL LAW CHAMBERS Supreme Court Emphasizes Judicial Hierarchy: Contempt Case Against NCDRC Members in Ireo Grace Realtech vs Sanjay Gopinath (2024) Supreme Court Judgment on ED’s Arrest Powers Under PMLA: No Arrest After Special Court Cognizance | Tarsem Lal Case Analysis 2024 Supreme Court Quashes Bihar’s SC List Amendment: Tanti-Tantwa Merger Declared Unconstitutional Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka REHA BHARGAV 02 June 2025 The Supreme Court clarifies that the 30-day timeline to appeal a Juvenile Justice Board’s preliminary assessment order is directory, not mandatory. Read about this pivotal judgment in Child in Conflict with Law v. State of Karnataka (May 7, 2024), and its impact on juvenile justice in India. Introduction: A Landmark Judgment in Juvenile Justice Law The Supreme Court of India‘s ruling in Child in Conflict with Law through His Mother vs. State of Karnataka (May 7, 2024) marks a significant development in how Indian courts approach serious offenses involving minors. This case interprets the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, especially concerning the preliminary assessment process, appeal timelines, and trial jurisdiction. This ruling addresses whether the 30-day timeline to file an appeal against a Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) preliminary assessment is mandatory or directory, and whether the Children’s Court or Juvenile Justice Board holds appropriate jurisdiction in such cases. Case Background and Key Facts In this case, a minor was accused of serious offenses, including sexual assault under the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act). The Juvenile Justice Board initially ruled that the minor should be tried as an adult. However, this order was reversed in the absence of the Principal Magistrate. The child’s mother challenged the reversal, arguing for the original decision to stand—seeking a trial in the Children’s Court. The Karnataka High Court upheld her petition, prompting the State of Karnataka to escalate the matter to the Supreme Court. Legal Issues Considered by the Court Are Timelines Under the Juvenile Justice Act Mandatory or Directory? The Court examined Section 14(3) of the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, which stipulates a three-month timeline for completing the preliminary assessment by the JJB. The key question: Is this timeline legally binding (mandatory), or is it advisory (directory)? Jurisdiction of Children’s Court vs Juvenile Justice Board The Court also assessed whether a trial can proceed in the Court of Sessions when a designated Children’s Court is not established. The interpretation of the Act’s terminology played a crucial role in resolving this jurisdictional issue. Supreme Court Judgment Summary In its May 7, 2024 ruling, the Supreme Court clarified: The 30-day appeal timeline under the Juvenile Justice Act is directory, not mandatory. This allows flexibility to accommodate the complexities of individual cases. Procedural deadlines should not override the substantive right to a fair trial, especially in juvenile cases. The terms Children’s Court and Court of Sessions are functionally interchangeable under the Act, ensuring that jurisdiction is not lost due to administrative designations. The Court affirmed the High Court’s direction to conduct the trial in the Children’s Court, emphasizing a child-friendly, rehabilitative approach rather than a strictly punitive one. Conclusion: A Balanced Approach to Juvenile Justice This judgment underscores the judiciary’s commitment to balancing child rights with societal protection. By declaring the timeline for appeal as directory, the Court prevents procedural rigidity from hampering justice. It also highlights the importance of rehabilitative over punitive measures in juvenile justice. The case reinforces that procedural safeguards must align with the best interests of the child, ensuring that the legal system remains compassionate, equitable, and just. Case Details at a Glance Case Name: Child in Conflict with Law through His Mother vs. State of Karnataka Date of Judgment: May 7, 2024 Citation: [2024] 6 S.C.R. 234; 2024 INSC 396 Presiding Judges: Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Rajesh Bindal Relevant Laws: Juvenile Justice Act 2015, IPC, POCSO Act   Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Rules Compensation Cannot Replace Jail Time in Serious Crimes Under CrPC Section 357 Supreme Court Rules Compensation Cannot Replace Jail Time in Serious Crimes Under CrPC Section 357 Sada Law • June 4, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Emphasizes Judicial Hierarchy: Contempt Case Against NCDRC Members in Ireo Grace Realtech vs Sanjay Gopinath (2024) Supreme Court Emphasizes Judicial Hierarchy: Contempt Case Against NCDRC Members in Ireo Grace Realtech vs Sanjay Gopinath (2024) Sada Law • June 3, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Clarifies Appeal Timeline in Juvenile Justice Cases: Key Ruling in Child in Conflict with Law vs State of Karnataka Read More »

Get A Quote
Get A Quote