sadalawpublications.com

A DYNAMIC LAW JOURNAL

Menu

Live cases

Kerala High Court Seeks Clarification from Travancore Devaswom Board on Funding of Global Ayyappa Sangamam

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Kerala High Court Seeks Clarification from Travancore Devaswom Board on Funding of Global Ayyappa Sangamam Remarks About Sikhs: Allahabad High Court Reserves Verdict on Rahul Gandhi’s Plea Looking for Another Job, Even With Rival Company, is Basic Right of Employee: Calcutta High Court Presidential Reference on Governors’ Deadlines: Supreme Court Hearing (Day 7) P&H High Court Permits ED to Access Information Shared by France with IT Department in Amarinder Singh Case Indonesia’s Protests Persist as Authorities Clamp Down and Cases of Missing Persons Rise LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT PERITUM PARTNERS LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT QWICK JUSTICE LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT AEQUITAS JURIS LAW FIRM LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT MY DESIGNATION Kerala High Court Seeks Clarification from Travancore Devaswom Board on Funding of Global Ayyappa Sangamam Kashak Agarwala September 3, 2025 Introduction The Kerala High Court has sought detailed clarification from the Travancore Devaswom Board (TDB) regarding the funding of the Global Ayyappa Sangamam, an event organized to mark the platinum jubilee of the TDB. The programme, intended to showcase Sabarimala as a universal pilgrimage centre and promote religious unity, is scheduled to be held at Pamba from September 16 to 21, 2025. A PIL filed by advocate Ajeesh Kalathil Gopi challenges the event, alleging political misuse of Lord Ayyappa’s name and violation of statutory obligations. Queries on Financial Transparency The Vacation Bench of Justice Devan Ramachandran and Justice Syam Kumar VM questioned the TDB about the event’s funding sources. The Court directed the Board to submit a detailed account of financing, including sponsorship arrangements. Observing lack of clarity, the Court stressed that the TDB must provide full information about the organisation and funding of the programme. Arguments of the Petitioner The petitioner alleged that the State and TDB were attempting to project a political programme as a religious event. He contended that such an event violates the Travancore Cochin Hindu Religious Institutions Act, 1950, which entrusts the TDB with protecting the sanctity of the Sabarimala temple. Additional concerns included: Sabarimala is already among the most visited pilgrimage centres, needing no further promotion. The event symbolizes commercialisation of sacred customs. Despite huge revenues, the temple still suffers from poor amenities such as drinking water, sanitation, and crowd management, which remain unaddressed. The ruling political party was allegedly using Lord Ayyappa’s name for political and electoral gain. Stand of the TDB and the State Counsel clarified that no State funds or TDB corpus funds would be used for the event. It was claimed the event would be entirely sponsored by corporations. Justice Ramachandran, however, raised concerns about how sponsorship funds would flow through the TDB without impacting the corpus. Senior Government Pleader S. Kannan stated that the State’s role was limited to crowd management support. Issues of Secularism and Sanctity The petitioner argued that the government had exceeded constitutional limits by allowing the ruling party to derive political mileage from a religious event. He contended that politicising the sacred name of Lord Ayyappa amounted to a breach of secular principles and undermined the temple’s sanctity as mandated under the 1950 Act. Court’s Interim Directions The High Court directed the TDB to file a comprehensive affidavit detailing: The precise nature of the programme, The sources of funding, and Its connection to the platinum jubilee celebrations. The Bench stressed the importance of transparency and compliance with statutory duties to maintain the sanctity of Sabarimala. The matter is scheduled for further hearing on September 9, 2025. Representation of Parties For the State: Senior Government Pleader S. Kannan For TDB: Advocate G. Biju For Petitioner: Advocate Ajeesh Kalathil Gopi (appearing in person) Conclusion The Kerala High Court’s scrutiny underscores the balance between religious sanctity and political influence. Its decision will clarify whether the TDB can legitimately host such an event under its statutory framework and how funding transparency must be ensured for faith-based cultural programmes. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Kerala High Court Seeks Clarification from Travancore Devaswom Board on Funding of Global Ayyappa Sangamam Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Remarks About Sikhs: Allahabad High Court Reserves Verdict on Rahul Gandhi’s Plea Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Looking for Another Job, Even With Rival Company, is Basic Right of Employee: Calcutta High Court Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Kerala High Court Seeks Clarification from Travancore Devaswom Board on Funding of Global Ayyappa Sangamam Read More »

Remarks About Sikhs: Allahabad High Court Reserves Verdict on Rahul Gandhi’s Plea

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Remarks About Sikhs: Allahabad High Court Reserves Verdict on Rahul Gandhi’s Plea Looking for Another Job, Even With Rival Company, is Basic Right of Employee: Calcutta High Court Presidential Reference on Governors’ Deadlines: Supreme Court Hearing (Day 7) P&H High Court Permits ED to Access Information Shared by France with IT Department in Amarinder Singh Case Indonesia’s Protests Persist as Authorities Clamp Down and Cases of Missing Persons Rise LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT PERITUM PARTNERS LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT QWICK JUSTICE LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT AEQUITAS JURIS LAW FIRM LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT MY DESIGNATION DHCBA Expresses Concerns to CJI, Collegium Over Transfer of Delhi High Court Judges Remarks About Sikhs: Allahabad High Court Reserves Verdict on Rahul Gandhi’s Plea   Kashak Agarwala 03 SEPTEMBER 2025 Introduction The Allahabad High Court on Wednesday reserved judgment in an appeal filed by Leader of Opposition Rahul Gandhi. He challenged a Varanasi sessions court order directing a Magistrate to re-hear a petition seeking registration of an FIR against him for remarks made about the Sikh community during his visit to the United States. Background of the Case The complaint was filed in 2024 by Nageshwar Mishra, alleging that Rahul Gandhi made objectionable statements during a U.S. visit, claiming Sikhs in India faced insecurity. The complaint argued that the remarks were provocative, partisan, and capable of inciting unrest. Mishra also linked these remarks to Gandhi’s speech at Ramlila Maidan, New Delhi, in December 2019, which he associated with the Shaheen Bagh protests that later witnessed violence. Proceedings at the Magistrate Court The Magistrate initially dismissed the plea. Citing Section 208 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Court noted that offences allegedly committed outside India cannot be prosecuted without prior approval from the Central Government. This jurisdictional bar effectively halted proceedings at the Magistrate’s level. Sessions Court’s Order Dissatisfied, Mishra filed a revision plea before the sessions court. On July 22, 2025, the sessions court directed the Magistrate to re-hear the case afresh, with reference to relevant Supreme Court precedents. The order required the Magistrate to reconsider the merits of the complaint before passing a new ruling. Petition to the High Court by Rahul Gandhi Rahul Gandhi appealed against the sessions court order before the Allahabad High Court. He contended that the sessions court’s direction was unsustainable, as the Magistrate’s reliance on Section 208 BNS had been legally correct. The matter was heard by Justice Sameer Jain, who reserved judgment after considering submissions from both sides. Representation For Rahul Gandhi: Senior Advocate Alok Ranjan Mishra Conclusion The Allahabad High Court’s upcoming verdict will determine whether the Magistrate must revisit Mishra’s plea or if the earlier rejection under Section 208 BNS remains valid. The case raises critical questions on jurisdiction for offences allegedly committed abroad and the interplay of political speech with criminal procedure. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Remarks About Sikhs: Allahabad High Court Reserves Verdict on Rahul Gandhi’s Plea Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Looking for Another Job, Even With Rival Company, is Basic Right of Employee: Calcutta High Court Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Presidential Reference on Governors’ Deadlines: Supreme Court Hearing (Day 7) Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Remarks About Sikhs: Allahabad High Court Reserves Verdict on Rahul Gandhi’s Plea Read More »

Looking for Another Job, Even With Rival Company, is Basic Right of Employee: Calcutta High Court

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Looking for Another Job, Even With Rival Company, is Basic Right of Employee: Calcutta High Court Presidential Reference on Governors’ Deadlines: Supreme Court Hearing (Day 7) P&H High Court Permits ED to Access Information Shared by France with IT Department in Amarinder Singh Case Indonesia’s Protests Persist as Authorities Clamp Down and Cases of Missing Persons Rise LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT PERITUM PARTNERS LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT QWICK JUSTICE LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT AEQUITAS JURIS LAW FIRM LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT MY DESIGNATION DHCBA Expresses Concerns to CJI, Collegium Over Transfer of Delhi High Court Judges Bombay High Court Pulls Up Maratha Quota Protestors for Citywide Disruption Looking for Another Job, Even With Rival Company, is Basic Right of Employee: Calcutta High Court Kashak Agarwala 03 SEPTEMBER 2025 Introduction The Calcutta High Court has ruled that an employee’s decision to seek alternative employment—even with a rival company—cannot be treated as misconduct or moral turpitude. Justice Shampa Dutt (Paul), while hearing a plea by M/s Xpro India Limited challenging gratuity payment to a retired employee, held that such actions are neither dishonest nor immoral and therefore cannot trigger penal consequences under employment law. Case Background M/s Xpro India Limited appealed against orders of the Controlling Authority and Appellate Authority that had directed payment of gratuity to its former employee. The company alleged that the employee held secret meetings with a competitor, disclosed confidential product manufacturing details, and persuaded colleagues to help the rival set up its production system. Based on an enquiry officer’s findings, the company terminated the employee, treating his conduct as misconduct amounting to moral turpitude and invoked Section 4(6) of the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 to deny gratuity. Employer’s Allegations Employee breached agreement by collaborating with a competitor. Attended multiple meetings with the rival company before resigning and later joined them. Act was classified as misconduct involving moral turpitude. Company argued gratuity was forfeitable under Section 4(6) of the Payment of Gratuity Act. Orders by Authorities Both the Controlling Authority and the Appellate Authority rejected the employer’s stand. They found insufficient evidence of statutory breach and ruled gratuity is a protected right unless clear grounds under law exist. Directed the company to release gratuity payments, prompting the employer to approach the High Court. Court’s Analysis Justice Shampa Dutt found procedural lapses in the company’s internal enquiry. Noted lack of witness testimony and call records to substantiate allegations. Criticised the enquiry officer’s findings as an abuse of power unsupported by verifiable evidence. Held that pursuing better career opportunities, even with a rival, is not dishonest or immoral conduct. Declared that seeking new employment—proven or otherwise—does not amount to moral turpitude. Legal Reasoning Section 4(6) of the Payment of Gratuity Act permits forfeiture only if: Employer’s property is damaged, Misconduct involves disorderly/riotous behaviour, or The employee commits an offence of moral turpitude. Court held none of these grounds were met. The employer failed to prove loss or damage caused by the employee. Therefore, denial of gratuity was unjustifiable. Decision and Directions High Court dismissed Xpro India Limited’s petition. Directed the company to pay full gratuity with accrued interest to the employee within two months. Reaffirmed that statutory rights like gratuity cannot be denied on vague allegations. Representation Petitioner (Company): Advocates Nayan Rakshit and Nilay Rakesh. State: Advocates Avijit Sarkar and Abdus Salam. Respondent (Employee): Advocates Atanu Biswas and Mrinal S. Conclusion The Calcutta High Court reinforced that seeking better opportunities, even with competitor firms, is an employee’s basic right and does not amount to misconduct or moral turpitude. By safeguarding gratuity as a statutory right, the Court emphasized that employment mobility is essential to personal liberty and economic development, and workers cannot be arbitrarily deprived of such entitlements. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Looking for Another Job, Even With Rival Company, is Basic Right of Employee: Calcutta High Court Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Presidential Reference on Governors’ Deadlines: Supreme Court Hearing (Day 7) Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments P&H High Court Permits ED to Access Information Shared by France with IT Department in Amarinder Singh Case Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Looking for Another Job, Even With Rival Company, is Basic Right of Employee: Calcutta High Court Read More »

Presidential Reference on Governors’ Deadlines: Supreme Court Hearing (Day 7)

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Presidential Reference on Governors’ Deadlines: Supreme Court Hearing (Day 7) P&H High Court Permits ED to Access Information Shared by France with IT Department in Amarinder Singh Case Indonesia’s Protests Persist as Authorities Clamp Down and Cases of Missing Persons Rise LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT PERITUM PARTNERS LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT QWICK JUSTICE LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT AEQUITAS JURIS LAW FIRM LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT MY DESIGNATION DHCBA Expresses Concerns to CJI, Collegium Over Transfer of Delhi High Court Judges Bombay High Court Pulls Up Maratha Quota Protestors for Citywide Disruption Thailand’s Political Thaw Hinges on People’s Party Decision Amid PM Uncertainty Presidential Reference on Governors’ Deadlines: Supreme Court Hearing (Day 7) Kashak Agarwala 03 SEPTEMBER 2025 Introduction The Supreme Court Constitution Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai and comprising Justices Surya Kant, Vikram Nath, PS Narasimha, and Atul S Chandurkar, continued hearing arguments on the Presidential Reference regarding the ambit of Articles 200 and 201 of the Constitution. The issue stems from the Court’s earlier ruling dated April 8, which prescribed timelines for Governors and the President to act on Bills passed by State legislatures. Background of the Reference President Droupadi Murmu referred the matter, expressing doubts over whether judicially imposed deadlines and the doctrine of “deemed assent” could be constitutionally sustained. Several States, including Kerala and Tamil Nadu, opposed the maintainability of the reference. The Union Government supported the reference, arguing that gubernatorial and presidential powers under Articles 200 and 201 are high constitutional functions and cannot be time-bound by judicial direction. Key Arguments Kapil Sibal (Senior Advocate) Emphasized that the will of the legislature represents the will of the people and cannot be obstructed by executive inaction or overreach. Stated that legislative enactments carry a presumption of constitutionality, which can only be contested in courts. Argued that Governors are not to review legislative intent but to act expeditiously, as implied in Article 200’s phrase “as soon as possible.” Warned against broad interpretations of executive discretion, cautioning that it could stall governance and create constitutional deadlocks. Asserted that once a legislature re-enacts a Bill after reconsideration, the Governor cannot withhold assent again without undermining the constitutional framework. Gopal Subramaniam (Senior Advocate for Karnataka) Highlighted that India’s democratic system is rooted in the cabinet form of government. Governors and the President act as titular heads and must act on the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers. Referred to Kesavananda Bharati to stress that the cabinet system is part of the Constitution’s basic structure. Warned that expanding gubernatorial discretion would erode the principle of separation of powers and parliamentary democracy. Anand Sharma (Senior Advocate, Former Union Minister) Asserted that Articles 200 and 201 must be read in line with federal principles. Governors have no authority to nullify the will of the legislature by indefinitely withholding assent. Argued that “as soon as possible” must be interpreted as “without undue delay,” else it risks paralysing State legislatures. Warned against misuse of the Governor’s office to distort Centre-State relations. Observations from the Bench Justice Surya Kant: “The Governor cannot be a postman, but neither can he act as a super-legislature.” Justice Narasimha: Queried the extent of a Governor’s role in examining repugnancy between State and Central laws. Bench discussed whether judicially imposed timelines amount to amending the Constitution; counsel clarified that timelines are functional standards, not amendments. Conclusion of Day 7 The Court concluded that the interpretation of Articles 200 and 201 raised complex constitutional concerns that must be handled carefully to preserve balance between legislative authority and executive discretion. Proceedings will continue, with further arguments expected from senior counsel and the Solicitor General. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Presidential Reference on Governors’ Deadlines: Supreme Court Hearing (Day 7) Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments P&H High Court Permits ED to Access Information Shared by France with IT Department in Amarinder Singh Case Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Indonesia’s Protests Persist as Authorities Clamp Down and Cases of Missing Persons Rise Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Presidential Reference on Governors’ Deadlines: Supreme Court Hearing (Day 7) Read More »

P&H High Court Permits ED to Access Information Shared by France with IT Department in Amarinder Singh Case

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today P&H High Court Permits ED to Access Information Shared by France with IT Department in Amarinder Singh Case Indonesia’s Protests Persist as Authorities Clamp Down and Cases of Missing Persons Rise LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT PERITUM PARTNERS LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT QWICK JUSTICE LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT AEQUITAS JURIS LAW FIRM LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT MY DESIGNATION DHCBA Expresses Concerns to CJI, Collegium Over Transfer of Delhi High Court Judges Bombay High Court Pulls Up Maratha Quota Protestors for Citywide Disruption Thailand’s Political Thaw Hinges on People’s Party Decision Amid PM Uncertainty China and Russia Tout “Global South” Security Order at SCO Summit in Tianjin P&H High Court Permits ED to Access Information Shared by France with IT Department in Amarinder Singh Case Kashak Agarwala 3 September 2025  Introduction The Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday delivered a landmark ruling in the case concerning alleged undisclosed foreign assets of former Punjab Chief Minister Captain Amarinder Singh and his son, Raninder Singh. Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya held that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) can access confidential information originally shared by France with India’s Income Tax (IT) Department, rejecting arguments that such access would breach international treaty obligations. Background of the Dispute The case stems from proceedings under Section 277 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and related provisions of the IPC against Amarinder and Raninder Singh, involving allegations of concealed accounts in Switzerland and Dubai. The IT Department received information from France under the 1994 Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA), which was subsequently placed on record before a Magistrate. In parallel, the ED initiated an inquiry under the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) and sought access to the same material. Petitioners’ Arguments The petitioners argued that the ED was a third party to IT proceedings and therefore not entitled to access documents received under treaty obligations. They invoked Article 28 of the Indo-French DTAA, which enforces confidentiality of exchanged information, warning that ED’s access would amount to bypassing the treaty. They contended that the trial and revisional courts erred in granting such access, and sought to block the ED’s use of the documents. Court’s Findings Justice Dahiya upheld the lower court rulings, emphasizing that once documents are on record before a Magistrate, the ED may rely on them for investigations. The Court clarified that the ED was not directly seeking information from France, but only using materials already filed in Indian proceedings. It ruled that treaty obligations could not be invoked by individuals to shield themselves from domestic investigations. Treaty Considerations The Court underscored that Article 28 of the DTAA ensures confidentiality to prevent public dissemination, not to obstruct legitimate inter-agency investigations. It noted that if any treaty violation were to occur, it was the IT Department’s prerogative—not that of private petitioners—to raise objections. The ED was permitted to access and use the information for its proceedings, but disclosure to the public remains restricted unless authorized by law. Legal Significance The judgment establishes that international confidentiality clauses cannot be used as a shield by individuals to avoid scrutiny under domestic law. It affirms the principle of inter-agency cooperation, allowing ED to rely on IT Department material for parallel proceedings under FEMA. The ruling strengthens India’s capacity to enforce financial laws while honoring treaty obligations in spirit. Representation For Amarinder Singh and Raninder Singh: Advocates Gurmohan Singh Bedi, Amandeep S. Talwar, Pawandeep Singh, Anand V. Khanna, and Amika Bedi. For ED and IT Department: Special Counsel Zoheb Hossain, Senior Panel Counsel Lokesh Narang, and Advocate Vipul Joshi. Conclusion With this ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has reaffirmed that treaty confidentiality cannot override the demands of domestic enforcement. The ED may now move forward with its investigation into alleged foreign assets of Amarinder and Raninder Singh, marking a critical precedent in balancing international obligations with India’s sovereign investigative powers. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases P&H High Court Permits ED to Access Information Shared by France with IT Department in Amarinder Singh Case Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Indonesia’s Protests Persist as Authorities Clamp Down and Cases of Missing Persons Rise Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments DHCBA Expresses Concerns to CJI, Collegium Over Transfer of Delhi High Court Judges Sada Law • September 3, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

P&H High Court Permits ED to Access Information Shared by France with IT Department in Amarinder Singh Case Read More »

Indonesia’s Protests Persist as Authorities Clamp Down and Cases of Missing Persons Rise

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Indonesia’s Protests Persist as Authorities Clamp Down and Cases of Missing Persons Rise LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT PERITUM PARTNERS LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT QWICK JUSTICE LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT AEQUITAS JURIS LAW FIRM LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT MY DESIGNATION DHCBA Expresses Concerns to CJI, Collegium Over Transfer of Delhi High Court Judges Bombay High Court Pulls Up Maratha Quota Protestors for Citywide Disruption Thailand’s Political Thaw Hinges on People’s Party Decision Amid PM Uncertainty China and Russia Tout “Global South” Security Order at SCO Summit in Tianjin SC Calls SIR Confusion a “Trust Deficit”; EC: Objections Accepted After Deadline Indonesia’s Protests Persist as Authorities Clamp Down and Cases of Missing Persons Rise Shristi Singh 03 SEPTEMBER 2025 Introduction Despite a heavy security presence, protests across Indonesia showed no signs of abating on September 3. Women activists took to the streets of Jakarta wielding brooms as symbols of reform, even as human rights groups confirmed that at least 20 people remain missing following last week’s clashes. The rising cases of disappearance and allegations of police brutality have intensified calls for accountability. Background & Context The unrest began in late August after revelations of a lavish housing allowance for lawmakers, seen as tone-deaf amid economic struggles. Outrage peaked after the death of Affan Kurniawan, a ride-hailing driver, during a protest. Demonstrations quickly spread nationwide, with incidents of arson at legislative buildings. Government concessions, including a rollback of the allowance, have so far failed to pacify the public. Current Developments Women protestors, carrying brooms as symbolic tools of sweeping reform, staged sit-ins outside Parliament against corruption and police brutality. A human rights coalition verified reports of 20 missing persons, urging accountability and transparency. The United Nations has called on Indonesian authorities to investigate allegations of excessive force and disappearances. Despite a strong security clampdown, demonstrations continued in Bandung, Makassar, and Yogyakarta, signaling persistent defiance. Analysis Civil Fracture Widening: The persistence of protests reflects deep distrust in institutions and rising anger at elite privilege. State Response Deficiency: Reliance on force over dialogue risks aggravating tensions, rather than restoring stability. Potential for Reform: The broom-led women’s protests highlight growing momentum for a grassroots reform movement—but its impact will depend on systemic government action. Conclusion Indonesia stands at a crossroads: whether to engage in reform and reconciliation or continue down a path of repression and division. The outcome will define the future of its democracy and the credibility of its institutions in the eyes of its citizens and the world. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Indonesia’s Protests Persist as Authorities Clamp Down and Cases of Missing Persons Rise Sada Law • September 4, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments DHCBA Expresses Concerns to CJI, Collegium Over Transfer of Delhi High Court Judges Sada Law • September 3, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Bombay High Court Pulls Up Maratha Quota Protestors for Citywide Disruption Sada Law • September 3, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Indonesia’s Protests Persist as Authorities Clamp Down and Cases of Missing Persons Rise Read More »

DHCBA Expresses Concerns to CJI, Collegium Over Transfer of Delhi High Court Judges

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today DHCBA Expresses Concerns to CJI, Collegium Over Transfer of Delhi High Court Judges Bombay High Court Pulls Up Maratha Quota Protestors for Citywide Disruption Thailand’s Political Thaw Hinges on People’s Party Decision Amid PM Uncertainty China and Russia Tout “Global South” Security Order at SCO Summit in Tianjin SC Calls SIR Confusion a “Trust Deficit”; EC: Objections Accepted After Deadline “Hydrogen Bomb Ahead”: Rahul Gandhi Vows Exposure of Massive Vote Theft Supreme Court Seeks Centre’s Reply to Tamil Nadu Plea on EWS Quota Reimbursements System that lets rapists walk free: Supreme Court Restores Conviction of Men Who Raped 12-Year-Old Supreme Court Calls for Paralegal Volunteers to Assist Voters in Bihar SIR Exercise LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CYRALAW DHCBA Expresses Concerns to CJI, Collegium Over Transfer of Delhi High Court Judges   Kashak Agarwala 01 SEPTEMBER 2025 Introduction The Delhi High Court Bar Association (DHCBA) has written to Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai and the Supreme Court Collegium, raising objections to the recent transfer of judges from the Delhi High Court. The Bar Association flagged issues of transparency, judicial continuity, and the marginalization of local lawyers in the elevation process. Doubts of the Bar Association Unease Over Transfers In its letter dated September 1, the DHCBA said that the recent judicial transfers have created unease not only among practicing lawyers but also within the institution itself. Demand for Transparency The Association demanded greater transparency and consultation in judicial appointments and transfers, arguing that secrecy undermines confidence in the system. Significance of Judicial Continuity Judges who rise from the Delhi Bar bring unique insights into the capital’s legal ecosystem. Their presence strengthens trust between the Bench and the Bar. Arbitrary transfers, DHCBA said, dilute this judicial continuity. Disregarding Local Elevation The Association highlighted concerns that lawyers from the Delhi Bar are being overlooked for elevation. Currently, one-third of the Delhi High Court judges belong to other jurisdictions. This, DHCBA warned, could widen the divide between the Bench and litigants’ lived experiences in Delhi. Threat to Telesom* and Trust in the System (*likely intended as “Telesis” or “Telos” in source — i.e., long-term purpose/stability) DHCBA cautioned that unchecked transfer patterns could: Erode the morale of the Bar. Weaken trust in the judicial appointment system. Undermine the stability and continuity needed for the effective functioning of the High Court. Recent Transfers in Focus The Collegium recently recommended the transfer of two judges from the Delhi High Court: Justice Tara Vitasta Ganju → transferred to Calcutta High Court. Justice Arun Monga → transferred to Rajasthan High Court. Notably, Justice Monga’s transfer came barely a month after his oath-taking in July 2025, when he joined five other judges elevated from across India. Conclusion DHCBA concluded that the Delhi High Court, as the custodian of justice in the nation’s capital, requires stability, continuity, and mutual confidence between the Bench and the Bar. Without this, the association warned, public trust in judicial processes could erode. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases DHCBA Expresses Concerns to CJI, Collegium Over Transfer of Delhi High Court Judges Sada Law • September 3, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Bombay High Court Pulls Up Maratha Quota Protestors for Citywide Disruption Sada Law • September 3, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Thailand’s Political Thaw Hinges on People’s Party Decision Amid PM Uncertainty Sada Law • September 3, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

DHCBA Expresses Concerns to CJI, Collegium Over Transfer of Delhi High Court Judges Read More »

Bombay High Court Pulls Up Maratha Quota Protestors for Citywide Disruption

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Bombay High Court Pulls Up Maratha Quota Protestors for Citywide Disruption Thailand’s Political Thaw Hinges on People’s Party Decision Amid PM Uncertainty China and Russia Tout “Global South” Security Order at SCO Summit in Tianjin SC Calls SIR Confusion a “Trust Deficit”; EC: Objections Accepted After Deadline “Hydrogen Bomb Ahead”: Rahul Gandhi Vows Exposure of Massive Vote Theft Supreme Court Seeks Centre’s Reply to Tamil Nadu Plea on EWS Quota Reimbursements System that lets rapists walk free: Supreme Court Restores Conviction of Men Who Raped 12-Year-Old Supreme Court Calls for Paralegal Volunteers to Assist Voters in Bihar SIR Exercise LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CYRALAW LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT CENTRE FOR CIVIL SOCIETY Bombay High Court Pulls Up Maratha Quota Protestors for Citywide Disruption Kashak Agarwala 01 SEPTEMBER 2025 Introduction The Bombay High Court on Monday came down strongly against the ongoing Maratha quota protests led by activist Manoj Jarange Patil, directing demonstrators to vacate Mumbai’s public roads by Tuesday noon. The Court observed that the agitation had crossed legal boundaries, paralysing South Mumbai and disrupting civic life during the festive season. [Amy Foundation v State of Maharashtra] Background & Context On August 26, the Court allowed protests only at Azad Maidan with prior police clearance. On August 27, permissions capped the gathering at 5,000 participants, limited from 9 AM to 6 PM, valid till August 29. Despite this, protestors occupied multiple key areas: CSMT, Marine Drive, Flora Fountain, Mantralaya, Oval Maidan, and even blocked access to the High Court itself. Violations of Earlier Orders Media reports and photographs showed protestors cooking, bathing, and playing games such as kabaddi and tug-of-war on public roads. The Bench of Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad criticized organisers for openly defying restrictions. The judges remarked:“They are right outside the High Court, blocking entry to lawyers and judges. You even boasted that more people will come. How do we deal with someone who refuses to obey the law?” State’s Stand Advocate General Birendra Saraf, representing the State, said the agitation crippled schools and colleges around Fort and Azad Maidan. He confirmed that violation notices were issued on August 31, though protestors refused to accept them. Saraf maintained that adequate facilities for toilets and food had been arranged, rejecting claims that poor conditions forced protestors onto the roads. Protestors’ Response Counsel for protestors admitted that roads were occupied but sought leniency for the overwhelming number of participants. He argued that many demonstrators acted independently, beyond Jarange’s control. Jarange himself has been on a hunger strike since August 29, demanding 10% OBC reservation for Marathas as Kunbis. Court’s Directions The High Court issued the following orders: All protestors, except those at Azad Maidan, must vacate public areas by Tuesday noon. The State must block entry of new protestors into the city until further orders. Food and medical aid must continue for demonstrators at Azad Maidan. Medical assistance must be provided to Jarange if his health worsens. Conclusion The Bench stressed that the Maratha quota agitation had crossed permissible bounds of dissent, disrupting public order and court functioning. Urging compliance, the judges concluded:“We hope and trust that good counsel will prevail upon the protestors and they will obey the directions of this Court.” Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Bombay High Court Pulls Up Maratha Quota Protestors for Citywide Disruption Sada Law • September 3, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Thailand’s Political Thaw Hinges on People’s Party Decision Amid PM Uncertainty Sada Law • September 3, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments China and Russia Tout “Global South” Security Order at SCO Summit in Tianjin Sada Law • September 3, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Bombay High Court Pulls Up Maratha Quota Protestors for Citywide Disruption Read More »

Thailand’s Political Thaw Hinges on People’s Party Decision Amid PM Uncertainty

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Thailand’s Political Thaw Hinges on People’s Party Decision Amid PM Uncertainty China and Russia Tout “Global South” Security Order at SCO Summit in Tianjin SC Calls SIR Confusion a “Trust Deficit”; EC: Objections Accepted After Deadline “Hydrogen Bomb Ahead”: Rahul Gandhi Vows Exposure of Massive Vote Theft Supreme Court Seeks Centre’s Reply to Tamil Nadu Plea on EWS Quota Reimbursements System that lets rapists walk free: Supreme Court Restores Conviction of Men Who Raped 12-Year-Old Supreme Court Calls for Paralegal Volunteers to Assist Voters in Bihar SIR Exercise LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CYRALAW LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT CENTRE FOR CIVIL SOCIETY LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT MALABAR GROUP Thailand’s Political Thaw Hinges on People’s Party Decision Amid PM Uncertainty Shristi Singh  01 SEPTEMBER 25 Introduction Thailand’s political future hangs in the balance after the Constitutional Court’s removal of Prime Minister Paetongtarn Shinawatra. With rival factions scrambling for power, the People’s Party, which controls nearly one-third of parliamentary seats, has emerged as the decisive force. Their backing now hinges on two conditions: a national referendum on constitutional reform and the dissolution of parliament within four months. Background & Context On 29 August, the Constitutional Court ousted Paetongtarn Shinawatra over ethics violations, making her the sixth Shinawatra-linked premier removed by judicial or military action since 2006. The ruling collapsed an already fragile coalition and triggered intense negotiations among political parties. The People’s Party, an anti-establishment force sidelined from power in 2023 by military-aligned elites, now holds the swing votes essential for coalition building. Key Developments The People’s Party has issued two non-negotiable demands: A nationwide referendum on constitutional reform. Dissolution of parliament within four months to pave the way for fresh elections. Both the ruling Pheu Thai Party and rival Bhumjaithai Party have signaled willingness to consider these conditions in exchange for support. Once reluctant to enter formal coalitions, the People’s Party now appears ready to leverage the political vacuum to push structural change. Political Calculations For Pheu Thai: Backing the referendum and early dissolution could secure short-term governance and a chance to renew their mandate. For Bhumjaithai: Aligning with the People’s Party could boost credibility but risks bringing elections sooner than desired. For the People’s Party: Their unprecedented bargaining power offers a historic chance to reshape constitutional rules and curb entrenched military-judicial interventions. Analysis Flashpoint for Reform: A referendum could pave the way for decentralization or new limits on judicial power—potentially breaking Thailand’s long cycle of coups and court-driven ousters. Electoral Momentum: The People’s Party’s stance resonates with public frustration over stagnant governance and recurring instability. Geopolitical Stakes: The next government’s orientation will influence Thailand’s balancing act between Western partners and China, with implications for ASEAN and the Indo-Pacific. Potential Scenarios Scenario 1: People’s Party sides with Pheu Thai → Referendum scheduled, parliament dissolved within four months. Scenario 2: People’s Party aligns with Bhumjaithai → Demands met, but coalition remains fragile. Scenario 3: People’s Party withholds support → Caretaker government persists, prolonging uncertainty. Conclusion The People’s Party has become Thailand’s kingmaker in the wake of Paetongtarn’s removal. Their conditions—referendum and early dissolution—could mark the start of a democratic reset or plunge the country into deeper instability if rival factions fail to reach consensus. The coming weeks will determine whether Thailand embraces reform or relives its familiar cycle of political deadlock. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Thailand’s Political Thaw Hinges on People’s Party Decision Amid PM Uncertainty Sada Law • September 3, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments China and Russia Tout “Global South” Security Order at SCO Summit in Tianjin Sada Law • September 3, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments SC Calls SIR Confusion a “Trust Deficit”; EC: Objections Accepted After Deadline Sada Law • September 2, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Thailand’s Political Thaw Hinges on People’s Party Decision Amid PM Uncertainty Read More »

China and Russia Tout “Global South” Security Order at SCO Summit in Tianjin

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today China and Russia Tout “Global South” Security Order at SCO Summit in Tianjin SC Calls SIR Confusion a “Trust Deficit”; EC: Objections Accepted After Deadline “Hydrogen Bomb Ahead”: Rahul Gandhi Vows Exposure of Massive Vote Theft Supreme Court Seeks Centre’s Reply to Tamil Nadu Plea on EWS Quota Reimbursements System that lets rapists walk free: Supreme Court Restores Conviction of Men Who Raped 12-Year-Old Supreme Court Calls for Paralegal Volunteers to Assist Voters in Bihar SIR Exercise LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CYRALAW LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT CENTRE FOR CIVIL SOCIETY LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT MALABAR GROUP LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT AMLEGALS China and Russia Tout “Global South” Security Order at SCO Summit in Tianjin Shristi Singh 1 September 2025 Introduction At the two-day Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit in Tianjin, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin jointly unveiled a blueprint for a “Regional Security-Economic Architecture” rooted in Global South solidarity. The move signals an attempt to position the SCO as a counterweight to the U.S.-led global order, stressing multipolar governance, infrastructure investment, and security cooperation. Background & Context The summit coincides with China’s upcoming Victory Day military parade, amplifying Sino-Russian camaraderie. More than 20 heads of state from Central and South Asia attended, boosting Xi’s campaign for expanded Eastern leadership. Beijing and Moscow framed Western-led structures as outdated and exclusionary, while presenting the SCO as inclusive and development-focused, particularly for emerging economies. Key Developments at the Summit Joint Security Vision: Xi and Putin declared the SCO’s role as a platform for shared defense and anti-Western alignment. Non-Interference Doctrine: Xi stressed sovereignty and non-interference as cornerstones of the new order. Counter to Sanctions: Putin claimed that Western sanctions and military alliances had only strengthened Eastern resolve. Economic Initiatives: Pledges were made for SCO-led infrastructure projects, new trade corridors, and financing mechanisms that bypass IMF/World Bank channels. Military Cooperation: Plans for expanded joint drills to deepen Eurasian defense partnerships. Domestic & International Reactions Global South Reception: Emerging economies welcomed the rhetoric, seeing it as a chance to reduce reliance on Western-backed institutions. Western View: Analysts downplayed the SCO as more symbolic than functional, but acknowledged its growing narrative appeal. Security Lens: Experts see Eurasian military coordination as a balancing act against U.S.-led alliances like NATO and AUKUS. Analysis Narrative Shift: The summit reinforces efforts to reframe global governance outside Western frameworks. Strategic Significance: Pairing the SCO meeting with the military parade underscores a dual message of political vision backed by hard power. Risks Ahead: Unless member states commit resources, SCO promises could remain rhetorical rather than transformative. Conclusion By staging a unified front in Tianjin, Xi and Putin advanced a Global South-centric vision of world order, challenging the U.S.-led system with an alternative rooted in sovereignty, security, and economic independence. While its long-term impact depends on follow-through by SCO members, the summit marked another step in the march toward a multipolar geopolitical landscape. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases China and Russia Tout “Global South” Security Order at SCO Summit in Tianjin Sada Law • September 3, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments SC Calls SIR Confusion a “Trust Deficit”; EC: Objections Accepted After Deadline Sada Law • September 2, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments “Hydrogen Bomb Ahead”: Rahul Gandhi Vows Exposure of Massive Vote Theft Sada Law • September 2, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

China and Russia Tout “Global South” Security Order at SCO Summit in Tianjin Read More »

Get A Quote
Get A Quote