sadalawpublications.com

A DYNAMIC LAW JOURNAL

Menu

Sada Law

Delhi High Court: Wife Who Quit Job to Care for Child Entitled to Maintenance

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Delhi High Court: Wife Who Quit Job to Care for Child Entitled to Maintenance Justice B.R. Gavai Sworn In as India’s 52nd Chief Justice, First Buddhist CJI in History Supreme Court Verdict on EWS Quota: Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India (2022) – Constitutional Validity of 103rd Amendment Scope of Court’s Power Under Section 319 CrPC to Summon New Accused After Trial: Supreme Court Judgment in Sukhpal Singh Khaira Case Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Three Lashkar Militants Killed in Shopian Encounter Amid Rising India-Pakistan Tensions Pakistan Admits Aircraft Damage After Precision Indian Strikes in Operation Sindoor Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Delhi High Court: Wife Who Quit Job to Care for Child Entitled to Maintenance MAHI SINHA 14 May 2025 The Delhi High Court rules that a wife who quits her job to care for her child is entitled to maintenance. Learn how this judgment upholds caregiver rights in Indian family law. Delhi High Court Upholds Maintenance for Wife Who Quit Job to Care for Child In a significant family law ruling, the Delhi High Court has declared that a wife who resigns from her job to take care of her minor child is entitled to receive maintenance. This landmark decision emphasizes that such resignation should not be considered a voluntary abandonment of employment. Case Overview: Praveen Kumar v. Pooja Arya In the case of Praveen Kumar v. Pooja Arya, the husband challenged a family court order directing him to pay interim maintenance to his wife. However, the court found that the wife’s decision to leave her job was not by choice but by necessity due to childcare responsibilities. Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma on Caregiving and Employment According to Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, “…the parent with custody bears a disproportionate amount of the responsibility for caring for a minor child, which frequently restricts their ability to pursue full-time employment, particularly in situations where there is no family support to care for the child while the mother is at work.” The court concluded that such a circumstance necessitates financial support, not penalization. Arguments from Both Parties The petitioner argued that the respondent-wife is well-educated and was earning ₹40,000–₹45,000 per month as a teacher, including income from tuition. However, the wife countered that she had to quit her job due to the unavailability of nearby employment and her responsibilities as the sole caregiver for their young child. Her counsel further emphasized that the lengthy commute and lack of nearby teaching opportunities made it impossible for her to continue working while raising a child on her own. Supreme Court Precedent: Rajnesh v. Neha (2021) The High Court cited the Supreme Court judgment in Rajnesh v. Neha & Anr. (2021), which held that if a professionally qualified wife gives up her career to fulfill caregiving duties, this must be considered during maintenance evaluations. This precedent played a key role in the court’s rationale. Employment History and Financial Evaluation The respondent had worked as a guest teacher but left her job due to the significant challenges of parenting alone and the long commute. The High Court acknowledged her explanation and agreed with the family court’s finding that she was not entitled to maintenance while employed but was eligible for support afterward. Court’s Directive on Interim Maintenance The High Court instructed the family court to reexamine the application for interim maintenance, noting that the petitioner-husband’s bank statements and income affidavit were overlooked. As a practicing lawyer, the husband’s notional income was also factored into the decision. Meanwhile, the petitioner must continue making interim maintenance payments. Conclusion: A Step Forward for Caregiver Rights in Indian Family Law The Delhi High Court’s decision in Praveen Kumar v. Pooja Arya reinforces the legal recognition of the challenges faced by custodial parents—especially mothers—who sacrifice professional opportunities to care for their children. By aligning with the precedent set in Rajnesh v. Neha, the court affirms that maintenance rights must consider the social and practical realities of caregiving. This judgment sets a strong precedent in favor of equitable treatment and financial protection for dependent spouses in family law cases across India. 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: Wife Who Quit Job to Care for Child Entitled to Maintenance Delhi High Court: Wife Who Quit Job to Care for Child Entitled to Maintenance Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Justice B.R. Gavai Sworn In as India’s 52nd Chief Justice, First Buddhist CJI in History Justice B.R. Gavai Sworn In as India’s 52nd Chief Justice, First Buddhist CJI in History Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Delhi High Court: Wife Who Quit Job to Care for Child Entitled to Maintenance Read More »

Justice B.R. Gavai Sworn In as India’s 52nd Chief Justice, First Buddhist CJI in History

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Justice B.R. Gavai Sworn In as India’s 52nd Chief Justice, First Buddhist CJI in History Supreme Court Verdict on EWS Quota: Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India (2022) – Constitutional Validity of 103rd Amendment Scope of Court’s Power Under Section 319 CrPC to Summon New Accused After Trial: Supreme Court Judgment in Sukhpal Singh Khaira Case Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Three Lashkar Militants Killed in Shopian Encounter Amid Rising India-Pakistan Tensions Pakistan Admits Aircraft Damage After Precision Indian Strikes in Operation Sindoor Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Delhi Airport Disruptions: 97 Flights Cancelled, 150 Delayed Amid Regional Tensions Justice B.R. Gavai Sworn In as India’s 52nd Chief Justice, First Buddhist CJI in History MAHI SINHA 14 May 2025 Justice B.R. Gavai becomes the 52nd Chief Justice of India, marking a historic milestone as the first Buddhist and second Dalit CJI. Discover his legal journey and impact on SC representation. Justice B.R. Gavai Sworn In as the 52nd Chief Justice of India In a historic ceremony held at the Rashtrapati Bhavan on May 14, 2025, Justice Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai was officially sworn in as the 52nd Chief Justice of India (CJI). The oath was administered by President Droupadi Murmu. Historic Firsts: Buddhist and Dalit Representation Justice Gavai’s appointment marks a significant moment in Indian judicial history. He is the first member of the Buddhist community and only the second Dalit to hold the office of CJI, following Justice K.G. Balakrishnan. He succeeds Justice Sanjiv Khanna, who retired on May 13, 2025. Justice Gavai will serve as Chief Justice until his retirement on November 23, 2025. Early Life and Background Born on November 24, 1960, in Amravati, Maharashtra, Justice Gavai hails from a family rooted in Ambedkarite values. His father, R.S. Gavai, was a prominent leader of the Republican Party of India and served as governor of Bihar, Sikkim, and Kerala. Legal Career and Judicial Service Justice Gavai began his legal career under the mentorship of Bar. Raja S. Bhonsale, a former High Court judge. Between 1987 and 1990, he practiced independently at the Bombay High Court, later focusing on its Nagpur Bench from 1990 onward. He practiced constitutional and administrative law, representing public entities like SICOM and several municipal corporations. Justice Gavai also served as: Standing Counsel for Amravati University and local municipal bodies Additional Public Prosecutor and Assistant Government Pleader (1992–1993) Government Pleader and Public Prosecutor at Nagpur Bench (2000) He was appointed an Additional Judge of the Bombay High Court on November 14, 2003. Rising Representation in the Supreme Court Justice Gavai’s elevation reflects a rising trend in the Supreme Court of India‘s inclusivity. Alongside Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Prasanna B. Varale, he is one of three active Justices from the Scheduled Caste (SC) community—an unprecedented level of representation in the Court’s history. Notably, both Justice Gavai and Justice Varale are Buddhists, making this the first time two Buddhist justices serve concurrently on the Supreme Court bench. Conclusion: A Landmark Moment in Indian Judicial History The appointment of Justice B.R. Gavai as the 52nd Chief Justice of India is not just a personal milestone—it is a historic moment for India’s judiciary. His journey from Amravati to the nation’s highest judicial office underscores the progress toward greater representation and inclusivity in the legal system. As the first Buddhist and second Dalit to assume this esteemed role, Justice Gavai’s tenure symbolizes hope, diversity, and justice for all communities. His legacy will likely inspire generations of legal minds committed to equality and constitutional integrity. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Justice B.R. Gavai Sworn In as India’s 52nd Chief Justice, First Buddhist CJI in History Justice B.R. Gavai Sworn In as India’s 52nd Chief Justice, First Buddhist CJI in History Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Justice B.R. Gavai Sworn In as India’s 52nd Chief Justice, First Buddhist CJI in History Read More »

Supreme Court Verdict on EWS Quota: Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India (2022) – Constitutional Validity of 103rd Amendment

Leave a Comment / Case law /

Trending Today Supreme Court Verdict on EWS Quota: Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India (2022) – Constitutional Validity of 103rd Amendment Scope of Court’s Power Under Section 319 CrPC to Summon New Accused After Trial: Supreme Court Judgment in Sukhpal Singh Khaira Case Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Three Lashkar Militants Killed in Shopian Encounter Amid Rising India-Pakistan Tensions Pakistan Admits Aircraft Damage After Precision Indian Strikes in Operation Sindoor Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Delhi Airport Disruptions: 97 Flights Cancelled, 150 Delayed Amid Regional Tensions Stalker Arrested for Chemical Attack on Female Advocate Amid Months of Harassment Supreme Court Verdict on EWS Quota: Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India (2022) – Constitutional Validity of 103rd Amendment NITU KUMARI 14 May 2025 Explore the landmark Supreme Court judgment in Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India (2022), which upheld the constitutionality of the 103rd Constitutional Amendment granting 10% reservation to Economically Weaker Sections (EWS). Learn about the legal challenges, key issues, and implications for India’s reservation policy. Introduction to the 103rd Constitutional Amendment and EWS Reservation The 103rd Constitutional Amendment Act, passed in January 2019, introduced a 10% reservation for Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) in educational institutions and public employment, excluding minority educational institutions. This amendment inserted Articles 15(6) and 16(6) into the Indian Constitution, enabling economic criteria as a basis for affirmative action. This historic change led to a constitutional challenge resolved by the Supreme Court of India in the Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India case on November 7, 2022. Case Background – Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India Case Details Case Title: Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India Judgment Date: November 7, 2022 Case Citation: 2022 INSC 1175 Bench: 5-judge Constitution Bench Presiding Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit (Chief Justice) Dinesh Maheshwari S. Ravindra Bhat Bela M. Trivedi Jamshed B. Pardiwala Key Facts of the Case Before the amendment, reservation percentages were: Scheduled Castes (SC) – 15% Scheduled Tribes (ST) – 7.5% Other Backward Classes (OBC) (non-creamy layer) – 27% Adding 10% for EWS increased total reservations to 59.5%. Petitioners Argued That: Economic criteria alone shouldn’t be the basis for reservation. Excluding SCs, STs, and OBCs from EWS quota is discriminatory. It violates the 50% ceiling set by the Indra Sawhney case (1992). EWS reservation in private unaided institutions violates the right to equality. Legal Issues Considered by the Supreme Court The Court examined three major constitutional questions: Does the 103rd Amendment violate the basic structure doctrine? Is excluding SCs, STs, OBCs from EWS quota unconstitutional? Can the 10% EWS reservation exceed the 50% cap on reservations? Supreme Court Judgment on EWS Reservation In a 3:2 majority, the Court upheld the constitutionality of the 103rd Constitutional Amendment. Majority View Justices Maheshwari, Trivedi, and Pardiwala ruled that: Economic disadvantage is a valid ground for reservation. Excluding backward classes from EWS quota is not discriminatory. The 50% ceiling is not rigid and can be exceeded in exceptional cases. EWS reservation in private educational institutions is constitutional. Dissenting View Chief Justice Lalit and Justice Bhat dissented, stating: The amendment violates the basic structure by excluding socially and educationally backward groups. It breaks the principle of substantive equality. EWS reservations should include the poorest among backward castes. Key Takeaways from the Verdict EWS quota is legally valid, even beyond the 50% ceiling. Economic criteria now form a valid basis for affirmative action. Private, unaided educational institutions must implement the EWS quota. The ruling reshapes the interpretation of equality and reservation policy in India. Conclusion – A Landmark Moment in Reservation Law The Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India judgment is a pivotal decision in Indian constitutional law. By affirming the validity of the 103rd Amendment, the Supreme Court of India has made it clear that economic disadvantage deserves recognition in India’s complex social structure. However, the exclusion of SCs, STs, and OBCs from EWS benefits continues to be debated, as it raises critical concerns about equality, inclusion, and caste-based discrimination. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws Supreme Court Verdict on EWS Quota: Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India (2022) – Constitutional Validity of 103rd Amendment Supreme Court Verdict on EWS Quota: Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India (2022) – Constitutional Validity of 103rd Amendment Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Scope of Court’s Power Under Section 319 CrPC to Summon New Accused After Trial: Supreme Court Judgment in Sukhpal Singh Khaira Case Scope of Court’s Power Under Section 319 CrPC to Summon New Accused After Trial: Supreme Court Judgment in Sukhpal Singh Khaira Case Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Upholds Bar Council of India’s Power to Conduct All India Bar Exam for Advocates Supreme Court Upholds Bar Council of India’s Power to Conduct All India Bar Exam for Advocates Sada Law • May 12, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Verdict on EWS Quota: Janhit Abhiyan vs Union of India (2022) – Constitutional Validity of 103rd Amendment Read More »

Scope of Court’s Power Under Section 319 CrPC to Summon New Accused After Trial: Supreme Court Judgment in Sukhpal Singh Khaira Case

Leave a Comment / 2022, Case law /

Trending Today Scope of Court’s Power Under Section 319 CrPC to Summon New Accused After Trial: Supreme Court Judgment in Sukhpal Singh Khaira Case Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Three Lashkar Militants Killed in Shopian Encounter Amid Rising India-Pakistan Tensions Pakistan Admits Aircraft Damage After Precision Indian Strikes in Operation Sindoor Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Delhi Airport Disruptions: 97 Flights Cancelled, 150 Delayed Amid Regional Tensions Stalker Arrested for Chemical Attack on Female Advocate Amid Months of Harassment Patna HC Rules Mandatory Retirement for Unapproved Absences as Excessive: A Case Analysis Scope of Court’s Power Under Section 319 CrPC to Summon New Accused After Trial: Supreme Court Judgment in Sukhpal Singh Khaira Case NITU KUMARI 14 May 2025 Explore the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment on Section 319 CrPC in the Sukhpal Singh Khaira case. Learn how and when courts can summon new accused after a trial concludes, and what this means for criminal justice in India. Introduction The Indian legal system provides mechanisms to ensure justice is served—even when new facts arise late in a criminal trial. One such provision is Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which empowers courts to summon additional accused based on fresh evidence. This blog explores the Supreme Court of India‘s interpretation of this section in the landmark Sukhpal Singh Khaira vs. State of Punjab case from 2022. Background of the Case On March 5, 2015, a First Information Report (FIR) was filed at Police Station Sadar Jalalabad against 11 individuals under multiple provisions of the: Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Arms Act, 1959 Information Technology Act, 2000 A chargesheet filed on September 6, 2015, named 10 accused who were put on trial. Notably, Sukhpal Singh Khaira was not included initially. However, the Sessions Court later issued a Summoning Order under Section 319 CrPC based on the evidence presented. Facts of the Case Of the 11 accused, nine were convicted and two acquitted on October 31, 2017. On the same day, the Sessions Court summoned five more individuals under Section 319 CrPC, including Khaira. The summons was challenged in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, which upheld the order. The matter was escalated to the Supreme Court of India. Key Legal Issue The central legal question was: Can a trial court summon a new accused under Section 319 CrPC after the trial of the co-accused has concluded and judgment has been delivered? Additional issues involved: Summoning in cases with absconding accused later brought to trial. Guidelines for courts invoking Section 319 CrPC. Relevant Legal Provision – Section 319 CrPC Section 319 of CrPC empowers courts to include additional individuals in a criminal trial if evidence suggests their involvement. Key aspects: It must be invoked “in the course of any inquiry or trial.” Requires prima facie evidence for summoning. Ensures the right to a fair trial for newly added accused. Supreme Court Judgment and Interpretation A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court of India delivered the verdict. Judges included: Justice Syed A. Nazeer Justice Bhushan R. Gavai Justice A. S. Bopanna Justice V. Ramasubramanian Justice B. V. Nagarathna When Is a Trial Considered Complete? The court ruled that a criminal trial is only complete once both conviction and sentencing are announced. Therefore, the court retains the authority to summon new accused after conviction but before sentencing. Guidelines for Using Section 319 CrPC Key takeaways: Courts can summon additional accused before sentencing or acquittal. If invoked post-argument but pre-judgment, a rehearing is required. In bifurcated trials, the power can be used if fresh evidence appears. Courts must determine whether the summoned person should be tried jointly or separately. Implications of the Verdict The ruling emphasizes that the objective of Section 319 CrPC is to achieve complete justice. It ensures that no offender escapes prosecution due to procedural limitations, while still safeguarding the rights of the accused. Conclusion The Supreme Court’s interpretation of Section 319 CrPC in the Sukhpal Singh Khaira case clarifies that courts can summon new accused even after a trial concludes, provided sentencing has not been finalized. This empowers the judiciary to respond to evolving evidence, reinforcing the principle that no guilty person should escape and no innocent person should suffer. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws Scope of Court’s Power Under Section 319 CrPC to Summon New Accused After Trial: Supreme Court Judgment in Sukhpal Singh Khaira Case Scope of Court’s Power Under Section 319 CrPC to Summon New Accused After Trial: Supreme Court Judgment in Sukhpal Singh Khaira Case Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Upholds Bar Council of India’s Power to Conduct All India Bar Exam for Advocates Supreme Court Upholds Bar Council of India’s Power to Conduct All India Bar Exam for Advocates Sada Law • May 12, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Legal Rights of Non-Tribals in Scheduled Areas: Supreme Court’s Verdict in Adivasis for Social and Human Rights Action v. Union of India (2023) Legal Rights of Non-Tribals in Scheduled Areas: Supreme Court’s Verdict in Adivasis for Social and Human Rights Action v. Union of India (2023) Sada Law • May 12, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Scope of Court’s Power Under Section 319 CrPC to Summon New Accused After Trial: Supreme Court Judgment in Sukhpal Singh Khaira Case Read More »

Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Three Lashkar Militants Killed in Shopian Encounter Amid Rising India-Pakistan Tensions Pakistan Admits Aircraft Damage After Precision Indian Strikes in Operation Sindoor Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Delhi Airport Disruptions: 97 Flights Cancelled, 150 Delayed Amid Regional Tensions Stalker Arrested for Chemical Attack on Female Advocate Amid Months of Harassment Patna HC Rules Mandatory Retirement for Unapproved Absences as Excessive: A Case Analysis Pakistan Air Force Officer Admits Role in Pulwama Attack: Tactical Brilliance or Strategic Misstep? Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert MAHI SINHA 14 May 2025 Bollywood singer Sonu Nigam moves the Karnataka High Court to dismiss an FIR filed over allegedly offensive comments made during a Bengaluru concert. Read the full story including legal charges and ongoing proceedings. Controversy Surrounds Concert in Bengaluru Popular Indian playback singer Sonu Nigam has approached the Karnataka High Court seeking the dismissal of a formal complaint filed against him. The complaint alleges that Nigam made offensive remarks toward the Kannadiga community during a recent concert in Bengaluru. The controversy began when a section of the audience requested Nigam to perform songs in the Kannada language. According to reports, the singer’s response was perceived as offensive, prompting backlash from local groups. Legal Charges and FIR Filed Against Sonu Nigam The complaint was filed by the pro-Kannada organization Karnataka Rakshana Vedike at the Avalahalli Police Station. The group accused Nigam of offending the cultural sentiments of Kannadigas by allegedly equating their song request to aggression and linking it to the Pahalgam terrorist incident. Nigam faces charges under several sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS): Section 351(2): Criminal Intimidation Section 352(1): Intentional Insult to Provoke Breach of Peace Section 353: Statements Conducing to Public Mischief Court Hearing and Sonu Nigam’s Defense The petition was heard by Justice Shivashankar Amarannavar, who was presiding over the vacation bench. A further hearing is scheduled for May 15, 2025. Nigam’s legal team is seeking a quashing of both the FIR dated May 3, 2025, and the initial complaint filed on May 2, 2025, by respondent Dharma Raj Ananthaiha. As a temporary relief, the plea also requests a halt to any further investigation into the matter. Nigam has since addressed the allegations in a video statement shared across social media, clarifying his intent and expressing regret if his remarks were misunderstood. Impact on the Kannadiga Community The alleged comments have reportedly caused distress within the Kannadiga community. Critics argue that Nigam’s statement painted an unfair and negative image of a community known for its peaceful and harmonious nature. The incident has reignited broader conversations around language sensitivity, cultural respect, and artists’ responsibilities during public performances. What’s Next? As the legal proceedings unfold, the focus remains on whether the FIR will be dismissed or if the case will proceed further in court. This case also brings renewed attention to the intersection of freedom of expression and community sentiments in India’s diverse cultural landscape. Conclusion: Balancing Artistic Freedom and Cultural Sensitivity The legal battle involving Sonu Nigam and the Karnataka High Court highlights the delicate balance between artistic freedom and cultural respect in India’s diverse society. While artists have the right to express themselves, public figures also carry the responsibility of acknowledging the sentiments of regional communities like the Kannadigas. As this case unfolds, it may set a precedent for how cultural disputes and freedom of speech are handled in the Indian judicial system. Whether the FIR is dismissed or proceeds to trial, the outcome will be closely watched by legal experts, civil rights activists, and fans alike. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Read More »

Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Three Lashkar Militants Killed in Shopian Encounter Amid Rising India-Pakistan Tensions Pakistan Admits Aircraft Damage After Precision Indian Strikes in Operation Sindoor Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Delhi Airport Disruptions: 97 Flights Cancelled, 150 Delayed Amid Regional Tensions Stalker Arrested for Chemical Attack on Female Advocate Amid Months of Harassment Patna HC Rules Mandatory Retirement for Unapproved Absences as Excessive: A Case Analysis Pakistan Air Force Officer Admits Role in Pulwama Attack: Tactical Brilliance or Strategic Misstep? Supreme Court Upholds Bar Council of India’s Power to Conduct All India Bar Exam for Advocates Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules MAHI SINHA 14 May 2025 The Supreme Court of India has directed the Centre to revoke the blocking order on the “4PM News” YouTube channel, raising vital questions about the IT Blocking Rules, 2009 and freedom of speech in India. Supreme Court Orders Unblocking of ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India has been informed that the Central Government has revoked its order to block the popular YouTube channel “4PM News.” Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing journalist Sanjay Sharma, confirmed this during proceedings before Justices BR Gavai and AG Masih. Case Background: A Challenge to IT Blocking Rules The petition, titled Sanjay Sharma vs Union of India and Ors, challenges the legality of the action taken under the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking for Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009—commonly referred to as the IT Blocking Rules. Despite the revocation of the blocking order, the petition continues to be heard to scrutinize the rules that enabled the initial ban. “Interim Relief Has Become Infructuous,” Says Sibal When Justice Gavai questioned whether there was anything left in the case post-unblocking, Sibal responded that the interim relief was now infructuous. Justice Gavai noted that the case would persist for “scholarly purposes,” suggesting its broader implications for digital rights and constitutional freedoms. Legal Challenge Against Arbitrary Blocking Sharma’s legal team argues that the blocking of the “4PM News” YouTube channel was arbitrary and unconstitutional, violating his right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution. The action, taken by YouTube on the government’s directive, was done without prior notice or a hearing. Demands for Greater Transparency in Blocking Procedures The petition calls for: Disclosure of the blocking order and supporting documents by the Union Government Repeal or reinterpretation of Rule 16, asserting that “shall” should be treated as a mandatory directive Interpretation of Rule 8 such that both the intermediary (like YouTube) and the content creator are notified Striking down or modifying Rule 9 to ensure that individuals receive a copy of the interim blocking order and are given a chance to be heard Next Steps in the Case The Supreme Court is considering merging this petition with another case challenging the 2009 IT Blocking Rules. On May 5, notice was issued to the Ministry of Home Affairs, YouTube, and the Union Government, with further hearings expected. Conclusion: A Landmark Moment for Digital Rights in India The unblocking of the “4PM News” YouTube channel by the Supreme Court is more than just a win for one journalist—it represents a critical examination of the **IT Blocking Rules, 2009** and their impact on **freedom of expression** in India. This case highlights the urgent need for **greater transparency**, **judicial oversight**, and **constitutional safeguards** in digital governance. As the judiciary continues to deliberate, the outcome could set lasting precedents for how online content is regulated across the country. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Three Lashkar Militants Killed in Shopian Encounter Amid Rising India-Pakistan Tensions Three Lashkar Militants Killed in Shopian Encounter Amid Rising India-Pakistan Tensions Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Read More »

Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Three Lashkar Militants Killed in Shopian Encounter Amid Rising India-Pakistan Tensions Pakistan Admits Aircraft Damage After Precision Indian Strikes in Operation Sindoor Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Delhi Airport Disruptions: 97 Flights Cancelled, 150 Delayed Amid Regional Tensions Stalker Arrested for Chemical Attack on Female Advocate Amid Months of Harassment Patna HC Rules Mandatory Retirement for Unapproved Absences as Excessive: A Case Analysis Pakistan Air Force Officer Admits Role in Pulwama Attack: Tactical Brilliance or Strategic Misstep? Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair MAHI SINHA 14 May 2025 Background: Mohd. Mohsin Khan vs. State Of U.P. The Allahabad High Court has provided relief to Muhammad Mohsin Khan (DSP rank officer in the Uttar Pradesh Police) by staying the suspension order issued by the Government of Uttar Pradesh. The suspension was issued following allegations of an extramarital relationship with a woman while Khan remains legally married. The order came in response to a formal complaint under Section 69 BNS (Sexual intercourse by adopting dishonest tactics, etc.), lodged by a student of IIT Kanpur. Legal Challenge to the Suspension Order Khan contested the suspension in the High Court, arguing that the UP Government acted solely based on the recommendation of the Additional Director General of Police, without exercising its own discretion. His counsel emphasized that this action violated principles laid down in administrative conduct rules. What Constitutes “Misconduct” Under Service Rules? Khan’s defense asserted that the sole accusation — an alleged extramarital affair — does not qualify as misconduct under Rule 29(1) of the UP Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1956. He categorically denied the allegations and argued that even if proven, such conduct does not meet the threshold of actionable misconduct. Key Court Observations and Past Rulings Referenced The bench, led by Justice Karunesh Singh Pawar, noted that the High Court had already stayed both the criminal investigation and the charge sheet filing related to the FIR. It was highlighted that: Entering a second marriage while the first is intact may be considered misconduct. However, merely maintaining a romantic relationship outside marriage does not equate to misconduct under prevailing service rules. The Court referred to precedent cases including: V.N. Daipuria vs. State of U.P. (2015): Suspension cannot be based merely on recommendation; the appointing authority must apply independent judgment. Shahjahan Khan vs. State of U.P. (2002): Cohabitation with a woman does not imply a valid marriage. These precedents reinforced the Court’s decision to stay the suspension. Next Steps in the Case The Court has directed the Standing Counsel to file a counter-affidavit within four weeks. The matter is listed for the next hearing on July 28, 2025. Representing the petitioner were Advocate Lalta Prasad Misra and Advocate Prafulla Tiwari. Conclusion This case not only highlights the importance of following due process in disciplinary actions against government servants but also opens up a broader legal debate on personal conduct vs. professional misconduct under service rules. The outcome may set a precedent for how similar allegations are treated within the framework of public service law in India. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Read More »

Three Lashkar Militants Killed in Shopian Encounter Amid Rising India-Pakistan Tensions

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Three Lashkar Militants Killed in Shopian Encounter Amid Rising India-Pakistan Tensions Pakistan Admits Aircraft Damage After Precision Indian Strikes in Operation Sindoor Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Delhi Airport Disruptions: 97 Flights Cancelled, 150 Delayed Amid Regional Tensions Stalker Arrested for Chemical Attack on Female Advocate Amid Months of Harassment Patna HC Rules Mandatory Retirement for Unapproved Absences as Excessive: A Case Analysis Pakistan Air Force Officer Admits Role in Pulwama Attack: Tactical Brilliance or Strategic Misstep? Three Lashkar Militants Killed in Shopian Encounter Amid Rising India-Pakistan Tensions MAHI SINHA 14 May 2025 Three Lashkar-e-Taiba militants were killed in an encounter with security forces in Shopian, Jammu & Kashmir. This incident follows a recent surge in India–Pakistan border tensions and a deadly attack in Pahalgam. Three Lashkar-e-Taiba Militants Killed in Shopian Encounter Three militants from the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) terrorist group were gunned down in an encounter with Indian security forces in the Keller area of Shopian, Jammu and Kashmir, on May 13, 2025. Security Forces Launch Search Operation in Shukroo Keller The confrontation occurred after Indian forces received specific intelligence about militant presence in the Shukroo Keller region. A coordinated cordon and search operation was launched by the Indian Army and Jammu and Kashmir Police to track down the suspected terrorists. As the operation commenced, the militants opened fire, initiating a fierce gunfight. The encounter ended with the elimination of all three militants. Authorities are currently working to confirm their identities. Background: Rising Tensions After Pahalgam Attack This development comes shortly after the deadly terrorist attack in Pahalgam on April 22, which led to increased tensions between India and Pakistan. In response, both nations agreed to a ceasefire, aiming to de-escalate the conflict. Pakistan’s Drone Strikes Escalate the Conflict Despite the ceasefire, Pakistan reportedly launched drone strikes targeting regions including Gujarat, Punjab, Rajasthan, and Jammu & Kashmir. Indian air defense systems successfully intercepted these threats, though the attacks have fueled fears of a broader conflict between the two nuclear-armed neighbors. India’s Firm Stance on Future Terror Attacks In a strong statement following the incident, the Indian government declared that any future act of terror on Indian soil would be regarded as an “act of war.” A senior official emphasized that this marks a formal shift in India’s counter-terrorism policy and defines a red line for terror groups operating from across the border. Conclusion: Tensions Remain High in Jammu and Kashmir While the elimination of the three Lashkar-e-Taiba militants is seen as a tactical win, the region remains on high alert. Ongoing ceasefire violations and military actions suggest that peace in Jammu and Kashmir is still fragile, with broader geopolitical implications for South Asia. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Sonu Nigam Seeks Dismissal of FIR Over Alleged Remarks Against Kannadigas at Bengaluru Concert Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Supreme Court Revokes Ban on ‘4PM News’ YouTube Channel, Questions IT Blocking Rules Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Allahabad High Court Stays Suspension of UP DSP Accused of Extramarital Affair Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Three Lashkar Militants Killed in Shopian Encounter Amid Rising India-Pakistan Tensions Read More »

Pakistan Admits Aircraft Damage After Precision Indian Strikes in Operation Sindoor

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Pakistan Admits Aircraft Damage After Precision Indian Strikes in Operation Sindoor Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Delhi Airport Disruptions: 97 Flights Cancelled, 150 Delayed Amid Regional Tensions Stalker Arrested for Chemical Attack on Female Advocate Amid Months of Harassment Patna HC Rules Mandatory Retirement for Unapproved Absences as Excessive: A Case Analysis Pakistan Air Force Officer Admits Role in Pulwama Attack: Tactical Brilliance or Strategic Misstep? Supreme Court Upholds Bar Council of India’s Power to Conduct All India Bar Exam for Advocates Legal Rights of Non-Tribals in Scheduled Areas: Supreme Court’s Verdict in Adivasis for Social and Human Rights Action v. Union of India (2023) How Global Powers Reacted to the India-Pakistan Standoff: A Nuclear Flashpoint in Focus Supreme Court: No Promotion for Posts Meant for Direct Recruitment – Nitu Kumari & Jyostnamayee Mishra Case Analysis Pakistan Admits Aircraft Damage After Precision Indian Strikes in Operation Sindoor MAHI SINHA 12 May 2025 India Strikes Back: Operation Sindoor Targets Terror Infrastructure India has initiated a bold response to rising cross-border terrorism through Operation Sindoor, launched on May 7, targeting terrorist infrastructure in Punjab, Pakistan-occupied Jammu and Kashmir (PoK). According to the Indian Armed Forces, the operation resulted in the elimination of 35–40 Pakistani Army personnel in exchanges across the Line of Control (LoC) between May 7 and 10. Precision Strikes: Targeting Pakistan’s Military Capabilities F-16 airbases, training camps, air defense units, and command centers were hit with precision, weakening Pakistan’s military infrastructure along its western front. Ceasefire Talks Limited to DGMOs India confirmed that future discussions with Pakistan will occur solely between the Directors General of Military Operations (DGMOs), excluding all other diplomatic or political matters. High-Level Security Review in New Delhi Prime Minister Narendra Modi held a high-level meeting in New Delhi with defense and national security leaders including Rajnath Singh, S. Jaishankar, Ajit Doval, and CDS General Anil Chauhan. Rajnath Singh Launches BrahMos Testing Facility Post-meeting, Rajnath Singh inaugurated the BrahMos Aerospace Integration and Testing Facility in Lucknow, emphasizing Operation Sindoor as a symbol of India’s political and strategic resolve. Heightened Security Along the Border The BSF remains on high alert, particularly in Jammu, due to ongoing threats from Jaish-e-Mohammed operatives attempting cross-border infiltration. Blackouts and Drone Alerts in Rajasthan Complete blackouts were enforced in areas of Rajasthan including Barmer, following reports of incoming drone activity. Authorities urged residents to stay indoors. Pakistan’s Call for Dialogue Amid Tensions Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif advocated for peaceful negotiations to resolve long-standing issues like the Kashmir conflict and water-sharing. He also praised opposition parties for their unity during the conflict escalation. Situation Normalizing in Jammu and Kashmir After four days of conflict, regions such as Akhnoor, Jammu, Poonch, and Rajouri have reported a return to daily life, with no fresh shelling overnight. Ceasefire Violations and India’s Retaliation Despite a ceasefire agreement, multiple violations were recorded on Saturday, including drone sightings and blasts in Jammu and Kashmir. In response, the Indian Air Force targeted eight military locations in Pakistan. DGMO-Level Communication Restores Temporary Calm A call at 3:35 PM on Saturday between DGMOs from both sides led to a truce agreement by 5:00 PM. However, Indian officials warned that any further violations would prompt strict retaliation. Ex-Gratia for Victims of Pakistani Shelling Omar Abdullah announced ₹10 lakh compensation for families of victims killed by Pakistani shelling in Jammu and Kashmir. International Response: Trump Announces Ceasefire Former U.S. President Donald Trump was the first to publicly confirm the ceasefire. India has maintained that sanctions, including visa restrictions and suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty, will continue despite the ceasefire. Operation Sindoor: Retaliation for Pahalgam Attack The April 22 terror attack in Pahalgam, which killed 26 civilians, triggered India’s launch of Operation Sindoor, targeting nine terrorist sites across Pakistan and PoK with precision airstrikes. Conclusion: A Fragile Calm and a Firm Resolve While the ceasefire brings temporary relief to civilians on both sides of the border, the situation remains tense. India has demonstrated a firm resolve in its zero-tolerance policy toward terrorism, backed by strategic military operations like Operation Sindoor. The coming days will reveal whether diplomatic channels can maintain peace or if hostilities will reignite due to continued provocations. For now, vigilance and preparedness remain India’s top priorities. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Pakistan Admits Aircraft Damage After Precision Indian Strikes in Operation Sindoor Pakistan Admits Aircraft Damage After Precision Indian Strikes in Operation Sindoor Sada Law • May 12, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Sada Law • May 12, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Delhi Airport Disruptions: 97 Flights Cancelled, 150 Delayed Amid Regional Tensions Delhi Airport Disruptions: 97 Flights Cancelled, 150 Delayed Amid Regional Tensions Sada Law • May 12, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Pakistan Admits Aircraft Damage After Precision Indian Strikes in Operation Sindoor Read More »

Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Delhi Airport Disruptions: 97 Flights Cancelled, 150 Delayed Amid Regional Tensions Stalker Arrested for Chemical Attack on Female Advocate Amid Months of Harassment Patna HC Rules Mandatory Retirement for Unapproved Absences as Excessive: A Case Analysis Pakistan Air Force Officer Admits Role in Pulwama Attack: Tactical Brilliance or Strategic Misstep? Supreme Court Upholds Bar Council of India’s Power to Conduct All India Bar Exam for Advocates Legal Rights of Non-Tribals in Scheduled Areas: Supreme Court’s Verdict in Adivasis for Social and Human Rights Action v. Union of India (2023) How Global Powers Reacted to the India-Pakistan Standoff: A Nuclear Flashpoint in Focus Supreme Court: No Promotion for Posts Meant for Direct Recruitment – Nitu Kumari & Jyostnamayee Mishra Case Analysis Jharkhand High Court: GST Refund of Pre-Deposit Can’t Be Denied Due to Limitation, Cites Violation of Article 265 Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US MAHI SINHA 12 May 2025 Congress leader Rahul Gandhi faces legal action in a UP court over his controversial remarks calling Lord Rama a “mythological figure” during a US visit. Read about the charges, political reactions, and legal context. Background of the Controversy A criminal complaint has been filed against Rahul Gandhi, Congress leader and Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, for referring to Lord Rama as a “mythological figure” during an interactive session in the United States. The remark, made last month, has sparked outrage and legal action. Complaint Filed in Varanasi Court The case was filed by Advocate Hari Shankar Pandey before the ACJM (MP/MLA) Court in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh. Pandey labeled Gandhi’s comment as “hateful” and “controversial,” accusing him of spreading misinformation and disrespect toward religious beliefs. Allegations of Hate Speech and Insult to Sanatan Dharma The complaint claims that Rahul Gandhi has repeatedly engaged in hate speech, particularly targeting followers of Sanatan Dharma. It alleges that he has made derogatory remarks about sacred symbols and avatars revered by Hindus. Supreme Court’s Displeasure Over Savarkar Remarks The lawsuit also cites recent observations made by the Supreme Court of India, expressing disapproval of Gandhi’s past comments on Veer Savarkar, a revered freedom fighter and ideologue. The court had previously criticized Gandhi and the Congress party for their repeated attacks on Hindu sentiments. Ongoing Pattern of Controversial Statements According to the complaint, this is not an isolated incident. Gandhi and the Indian National Congress have been accused of making inflammatory remarks about Hindu traditions and figures on multiple occasions, contributing to communal disharmony. Legal Charges Under Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Advocate Pandey has urged the court to take strict action against Rahul Gandhi under Sections 356, 351, 353, and 196 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). These sections pertain to promoting enmity, assault, and public mischief, among others. Conclusion This legal battle adds to the series of controversies involving Rahul Gandhi’s remarks on religious and national icons. As the matter proceeds in court, it remains to be seen how it will impact the political landscape ahead of the upcoming elections. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Sada Law • May 12, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Delhi Airport Disruptions: 97 Flights Cancelled, 150 Delayed Amid Regional Tensions Delhi Airport Disruptions: 97 Flights Cancelled, 150 Delayed Amid Regional Tensions Sada Law • May 12, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Stalker Arrested for Chemical Attack on Female Advocate Amid Months of Harassment Stalker Arrested for Chemical Attack on Female Advocate Amid Months of Harassment Sada Law • May 12, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Rahul Gandhi Faces Court Complaint Over “Mythological” Remark About Lord Rama in US Read More »

Get A Quote
Get A Quote