sadalawpublications.com

A DYNAMIC LAW JOURNAL

Menu

BJP

Delhi HC Orders Removal of Social Media Posts on BJP Leader Gaurav Bhatia’s TV Appearance

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Delhi HC Orders Removal of Social Media Posts on BJP Leader Gaurav Bhatia’s TV Appearance Delhi High Court Urges BCI and BCD to Frame Policy for Financial Aid to Families of Deceased Lawyers Delhi High Court Allows Patanjali to Use ‘Why Settle for Ordinary Chyawanprash,’ Restrains Reference to Dabur’s “40 Herbs” Karnataka High Court Allows Caste Survey to Continue with Voluntary Participation and Data Confidentiality Supreme Court Highlights Lingering Colonial-Era Land Disputes in India CM Attack Case: Delhi Court Directs Police to Provide FIR Copy to Accused Despite ‘Sensitive Case’ Claim Rajasthan High Court Dismisses Plea Seeking FIR Against Modi, Shah Over CAA Delhi High Court Rejects Bail Plea of Tahir Hussain in Ankit Sharma Murder Case Chennupati Kranthi Kumar vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors. – Supreme Court Judgment (25 July 2023) MD. Asfak Alam vs. State of Jharkhand & Anr. – Supreme Court Judgment (31 July 2023) Delhi HC Orders Removal of Social Media Posts on BJP Leader Gaurav Bhatia’s TV Appearance Kashak Agarwala 26 September 2025 Introduction The Delhi High Court has ordered the removal of allegedly defamatory social media posts and videos related to BJP leader Gaurav Bhatia’s television appearance on a News18 debate. Justice Amit Bansal ruled that if original uploaders fail to delete the content, intermediary platforms such as Google and X (formerly Twitter) must step in and ensure removal. Background of the Case The controversy began when a video clip of Gaurav Bhatia appearing on a News18 debate show hosted by Amish Devgan circulated online. In the clip, Bhatia appeared to be wearing a kurta without pyjamas or pants. Bhatia later clarified that he was wearing shorts, but argued that the content was deceptively presented and circulated without his consent. Bhatia’s Stand Represented by advocate Raghav Awasthi, Bhatia claimed the posts were not satire but outright defamation. He stressed that the material was offensive, vulgar, and ridiculed his physical appearance. Bhatia personally addressed the court, remarking that reputation takes decades to build and should not be destroyed under the pretext of humour. Court’s Observation Justice Bansal held that the posts prima facie caused reputational harm and could not be justified as free speech. The Court emphasized that freedom of expression under Article 19(1)(a) is subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2), including defamation. The Court directed that defamatory content must be removed promptly. The Defamation Suit Bhatia’s defamation suit names 22 defendants, including: Samajwadi Party’s social media unit Congress leader Ragini Nayak AAP leader Saurabh Bhardwaj Journalist Abhisar Sharma Digital outlets like Newslaundry and News18 Content creators like Rofl Gandhi and Ranting GolaAdditionally, intermediaries Google and X were made parties to ensure compliance with takedown orders. Free Speech vs. Defamation The case revives the debate between safeguarding free expression and protecting individual reputation. While satire and criticism are part of political discourse, the Court stressed that vulgarity and personal attacks cannot be shielded as humour. Political Context The controversy has taken a political turn. BJP leaders allege a coordinated smear campaign by opposition parties, while rivals argue that politicians must tolerate higher levels of criticism. However, Bhatia insists the posts crossed permissible limits, amounting to vulgar defamation rather than satire. What Lies Ahead The High Court’s directions mark a significant precedent in online defamation disputes involving political figures. While Bhatia may secure relief through takedowns, broader questions remain about intermediary liability and the limits of political satire in the digital age. Conclusion The Delhi High Court’s intervention underscores its commitment to protecting reputation in the face of online ridicule. By balancing free speech with restrictions against defamation, the ruling signals that humour cannot be used as a defence for vulgar and defamatory attacks on public figures. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Delhi HC Orders Removal of Social Media Posts on BJP Leader Gaurav Bhatia’s TV Appearance Sada Law • September 26, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Delhi High Court Urges BCI and BCD to Frame Policy for Financial Aid to Families of Deceased Lawyers Sada Law • September 26, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Delhi High Court Allows Patanjali to Use ‘Why Settle for Ordinary Chyawanprash,’ Restrains Reference to Dabur’s “40 Herbs” Sada Law • September 26, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Delhi HC Orders Removal of Social Media Posts on BJP Leader Gaurav Bhatia’s TV Appearance Read More »

Owaisi Blasts Assam BJP’s AI Video: ‘Muslims Seen as Problem, Dream of Muslim-Mukt Bharat’

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Owaisi Blasts Assam BJP’s AI Video: ‘Muslims Seen as Problem, Dream of Muslim-Mukt Bharat’ Delhi High Court Paves Way for Demolition of Unsafe Signature View Apartments Built for 2010 CWG Delhi High Court Rejects Bail Plea of Man Accused of Raping Minor Daughter ‘SEC has failed to take prompt action’: Supreme Court orders Maharashtra to hold local body polls by January 2026 Punjab & Haryana High Court Pulls Up Ex-Judge Alok Singh for Unjust Remarks Against Judicial Officer Gujarat High Court on Senior Advocates: Minimum 45 Years for Designation, Mandatory Mentorship for Young Lawyers LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT CHAMBERS OF DHRUV TOLIYA LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT ASPA LEGAL LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT SALVORS & CO. LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT ADV TANUSHKA KOHLI Owaisi Blasts Assam BJP’s AI Video: ‘Muslims Seen as Problem, Dream of Muslim-Mukt Bharat’ Shivani Garg 19 September 2025 Introduction A political controversy has erupted after the Assam unit of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) released an AI-generated video warning voters of a “Muslim-majority Assam” if the party were not in power. The video has been strongly criticized by All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) leader Asaduddin Owaisi, who described it as genocidal and defamatory, alleging that it reflects the BJP’s vision of a “Muslim-mukt Bharat.” Background The video, posted on BJP Assam Pradesh’s official account on X (formerly Twitter), is titled “Assam without BJP”. It depicts a scenario where Assam turns Muslim-majority, featuring visuals of men in skull caps, women in burqas, alleged illegal immigrants, and a claim that “90% of the population” would be Muslim. It ends with the cautionary line: “Choose your vote carefully.” Key Developments Asaduddin Owaisi condemned the video as “disgusting” and a reflection of “repulsive Hindutva ideology.” He accused the BJP of portraying Muslims as a problem and aiming for a “Muslim-free India.” BJP leaders defended the video as highlighting demographic threats from illegal immigrants in certain districts. Assam Minister Pijush Hazarika argued that critics were misrepresenting the message, insisting the issue was illegal immigration, not religion. Issues The video raises concerns about hate speech, stereotyping, and depicting an entire community as a threat. Ethical questions about the use of AI in political propaganda and misinformation. Potential violation of election codes and laws relating to communal harmony. Growing trend of communal and demographic narratives shaping political campaigns in Assam. Current Status The video has drawn backlash from opposition parties, with Congress urging the Election Commission to intervene. AIMIM and other political voices have framed the issue as an attack on Indian Muslims, while BJP insists it is merely raising concerns about illegal immigration and demographic changes. The debate has now entered national discourse, with focus on both communal politics and the use of AI in election propaganda. Conclusion The Assam BJP’s AI video and Owaisi’s sharp rebuttal have intensified debates around communal politics, demographic anxieties, and the ethics of AI-driven propaganda. With the 2026 Assam Assembly elections approaching, the controversy highlights how technology is being weaponized in political narratives, raising urgent questions about free speech, hate speech, and electoral accountability. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Owaisi Blasts Assam BJP’s AI Video: ‘Muslims Seen as Problem, Dream of Muslim-Mukt Bharat’ Sada Law • September 19, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Delhi High Court Paves Way for Demolition of Unsafe Signature View Apartments Built for 2010 CWG Sada Law • September 19, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Delhi High Court Rejects Bail Plea of Man Accused of Raping Minor Daughter Sada Law • September 19, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Owaisi Blasts Assam BJP’s AI Video: ‘Muslims Seen as Problem, Dream of Muslim-Mukt Bharat’ Read More »

India’s Electoral Drama: Rahul Gandhi Allegations Spark “Vote Theft” Storm

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today India’s Electoral Drama: Rahul Gandhi Allegations Spark “Vote Theft” Storm Degrees on Protest, Justice on Hold: The Silent Crisis of Overnight Approved Law Colleges Supreme Court Asks Courts to Decide Bail Pleas Within 2 Months of Filing LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT SIDDHARTH & CO, ADVOCATES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT HAMMURABI & SOLOMON PARTNERS Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav: Impeachment in Limbo LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT SCHOOL OF LAW, GUJARAT UNIVERSITY LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT ADVOCATE SHRUTI BIST Real estate insolvency resolution should be project specific, not against entire corporate debtor: Supreme Court LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT S&A LAW OFFICES India’s Electoral Drama: Rahul Gandhi Allegations Spark “Vote Theft” Storm   Shristi Singh 14 September 2025 Headline: Rahul Gandhi lashes out at “vote theft” in latest election controversy, sparking nationwide protests over Indian electoral integrity Lead: On 28 August 2025, Rahul Gandhi, leader of India’s largest opposition party, accused the Election Commission and ruling BJP of “vote chori” (vote theft) in state assembly contests including Mahadevapura, Karnataka. Rallying protesters nationwide, Gandhi alleged manipulated electoral rolls favoured incumbents—a claim the Election Commission promptly dismissed as baseless, challenging Gandhi to formalize his concerns under statutory oath or apologize. The controversy has reignited debate over democratic safeguards and institutional impartiality amidst growing polarization. Background: In early August, Gandhi began leveling allegations of irregularities during the 2024 general election. He highlighted errors in voter registration rolls for Mahadevapura and called on ECI to investigate systemic manipulation. The Commission rejected unverified claims, citing procedural norms requiring signed affidavits and contestation deadlines. This latest flare-up has led to protests and social media campaigns organized by the Congress and aligned organizations, asserting that democratic norms are under threat. Developments and Significance: Political Polarization: The case hardened fault lines: BJP defended ECI’s conduct, while Gandhi accused it of institutional betrayal. Institutional Pressure: Questions about ECI autonomy and competence have been thrust back into the spotlight, particularly as electoral systems undergo digital transformations. Democratic Resilience: The debates come amid global concerns about democratic erosion; India’s handling may set examples regionally. Reactions: Election Commission: Declared allegations invalid unless substantiated with signed affidavits—warning Gandhi of legal consequences for defamation or slander. BJP Leadership: Accused Gandhi of conspiracy to erode trust in democracy; echoed ECI’s technical stance. Civil Society and Media: Pressed for transparency through independent audits, especially where digital systems may be vulnerable to manipulation. Analysis: Muddying the Playing Field: Accusations—even if unsubstantiated—breed mistrust and undermine voter faith. ECI’s Communication Failure: The Commission’s procedural response may alienate public sentiment—more explanation and openness might be needed. Long-Term Trust Deficit: Without reforms and responsive institutions, credibility gaps may widen—fueling populist narratives. Conclusion: India’s “vote chori” row underscores fragile trust in institutions at a moment when the world is watching. How ECI and political leaders choose to respond will deeply influence democratic resilience—not just for the upcoming vice-presidential election but for public faith across India’s vast electoral landscape. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases India’s Electoral Drama: Rahul Gandhi Allegations Spark “Vote Theft” Storm Sada Law • September 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Degrees on Protest, Justice on Hold: The Silent Crisis of Overnight Approved Law Colleges Sada Law • September 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Asks Courts to Decide Bail Pleas Within 2 Months of Filing Sada Law • September 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

India’s Electoral Drama: Rahul Gandhi Allegations Spark “Vote Theft” Storm Read More »

BJP Aims for 25% Vote Share in Kerala Local Body Elections

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today BJP Aims for 25% Vote Share in Kerala Local Body Elections Trump Names Political Aide Sergio Gor as U.S. Ambassador to India and Special Envoy for South & Central Asia LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT RELIANCE ARC LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT TRUE iQPRO LLP LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT THE OFFICE OF ALABHYA DHAMIJA, NOIDA LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT G D BANSAL & ASSOCIATES LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT MLM SCHEMES VICTIMS ASSOCIATION LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT VIGIL JURIS, MUMBAI US–South Korea Summit: Lee–Trump Talks on Burden-Sharing and China Strategy China to Host SCO Summit in Tianjin: A Diplomatic Milestone BJP Aims for 25% Vote Share in Kerala Local Body Elections Shristi singh 25 AUG 2025 Union Home Minister Amit Shah announces the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) aims for 25% vote share in Kerala local body elections, signaling a strategic push into southern India and challenging traditional political strongholds. BJP Sets Ambitious Target in Kerala Union Home Minister Amit Shah declared that the BJP is aiming for a 25% vote share in Kerala’s upcoming local body elections. Shah challenged Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan to a debate on disaster relief allocations, emphasizing the BJP’s focus on governance and development. Significance of the Move Kerala has historically resisted the BJP’s ideological influence, making it a critical target for southern expansion. Crossing even 20% vote share would mark a significant political breakthrough for the party. The party’s emphasis on nationalism is resonating with a small but growing base, particularly in central Kerala. Background: Kerala’s Political Landscape Traditionally, Kerala’s politics has been dominated by a two-front system: United Democratic Front (UDF) led by Congress Left Democratic Front (LDF) led by Communist Party of India (Marxist) The BJP remained largely absent for decades, focusing instead on northern and northeastern states. Recent successes in states like Tripura and Assam demonstrate the party’s ability to disrupt regional strongholds through grassroots networks and demographic shifts. Strategic Analysis Organizational Strengthening BJP’s push reflects investments in: Cadre development Community outreach Local leadership building Policy Messaging The party highlights disaster relief, development, and governance, aiming to appeal as pragmatic and non-ideological. Opposition Response UDF and LDF may need to recalibrate strategies, including possible coalition talks, to counter BJP’s growing influence. Challenges Ahead Cultural Hurdles: Kerala’s political culture emphasizes social welfare, secularism, and local languages. Polarization Risks: BJP’s nationalistic messaging could alienate minority communities and intellectual segments, limiting outreach. Conclusion While achieving a 25% vote share remains ambitious, even nearing this target would reshape Kerala’s political landscape, forcing both UDF and LDF to rethink strategies and signaling a potential generational shift in voter alignment. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sadalaw. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases BJP Aims for 25% Vote Share in Kerala Local Body Elections Sadalaw • August 25, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Trump Names Political Aide Sergio Gor as U.S. Ambassador to India and Special Envoy for South & Central Asia Sadalaw • August 25, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments US–South Korea Summit: Lee–Trump Talks on Burden-Sharing and China Strategy Sadalaw • August 23, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

BJP Aims for 25% Vote Share in Kerala Local Body Elections Read More »

Supreme Court to Hear Fresh Plea on Electoral Bonds Transparency

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Supreme Court to Hear Fresh Plea on Electoral Bonds Transparency Chirag Paswan’s LJP-R Joins NDA Strategy Meeting Ahead of Bihar Assembly Elections Election Commission of India Delists 334 Unrecognised Political Parties Across the Country JOB OPPORTUNITY AT DENTONS LINK LEGAL, MUMBAI JOB OPPORTUNITY AT MZM LEGAL LLP, MUMBAI INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT THE YUVACRACY CENTRE FOR POLICY RESEARCH JOB OPPORTUNITY AT LAW OFFICE OF AARUSHI S. DESAI, AHMEDABAD LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT LEAD INDIA INDIA Bloc Strategy Meeting Held at Rahul Gandhi’s Residence LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT GEETANSH NAGPAL LAW CHAMBERS Supreme Court to Hear Fresh Plea on Electoral Bonds Transparency Shristi singh 10 AUG 2025 The Supreme Court of India will hear a petition challenging the government’s electoral bonds scheme, reigniting the debate on transparency in political funding and donor disclosure. Introduction The Supreme Court of India will on Monday hear a new petition challenging the government’s electoral bonds scheme.Filed by a coalition of civil society groups and former bureaucrats, the plea demands that political parties disclose donor details to promote accountability and prevent anonymous corporate influence in elections. Scene Outside the Supreme Court On Friday morning, lawyers and activists gathered on the lawns of the Supreme Court, holding placards reading “Democracy Needs Transparency” and “End Anonymous Funding.”The case is listed before a bench headed by Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, with Justices Sanjiv Khanna and B.V. Nagarathna. This hearing comes less than two years after the court struck down parts of the scheme — a ruling the government sought to bypass via legislative amendments in early 2025. Background: The Electoral Bonds Scheme Introduced in 2018, electoral bonds allow individuals and companies to donate to political parties through banking channels without publicly revealing their identities.While the government claims the system curbs black money, critics argue it enables opaque funding and shields donors from scrutiny. In 2024, the Supreme Court directed the State Bank of India to release donor and recipient data, revealing a concentration of funding towards ruling parties.In March 2025, Parliament amended the Representation of the People Act, 1951 to restore donor anonymity citing “national security and privacy” — sparking protests by opposition parties and transparency advocates. Petitioners’ Core Arguments The petitioners contend that the amended scheme violates democratic principles: Right to Information – Citizens must know who funds political parties that seek to govern. Threat to Electoral Equality – Large corporate donations without disclosure tilt the field towards wealthier parties. Risk of Policy Capture – Secret funding could influence laws to benefit select donors. Advocate Prashant Bhushan, representing the petitioners, stated: “Political finance without transparency breeds corruption. The amendments are unconstitutional and must be struck down.” Government’s Expected Defence The Union government is likely to argue that the scheme eliminates cash-based donations and ensures traceable bank transactions.Officials suggest donor privacy prevents “political retribution” against corporate contributors.BJP spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla defended the system: “We have brought clean money into politics through banking channels. Opposition outrage is selective.” Opposition’s Reaction Indian National Congress leader Jairam Ramesh hailed the hearing as “a step towards saving Indian democracy from becoming a corporate auction.” Aam Aadmi Party and All India Trinamool Congress also welcomed the move. Regional parties like the Naga People’s Front and Asom Gana Parishad expressed mixed views, citing funding concerns for smaller outfits. Expert Analysis Dr. R.K. Sanjoy (Imphal-based commentator): “In smaller states, modest donations can decide contests. Opaque funding benefits nationally connected parties.” Prof. Meera Sood (election law expert): “The court will assess if donor privacy outweighs citizens’ right to know — a test of proportionality in constitutional law.” Public Opinion Rajesh Jain (trader, Guwahati’s Panbazar): “If the money comes via banks, it’s legal — anonymity doesn’t matter.” Nabanita Saikia (college student): “We vote based on trust. Without knowing fund sources, how can we trust policies?” Looking Ahead The bench may fast-track proceedings, given the implications for upcoming state elections in Bihar, Maharashtra, and Assam.A verdict could reshape India’s political funding landscape, especially in regions where close contests are common. Conclusion This hearing is more than a legal dispute — it is a constitutional test of transparency in democracy. With political power and corporate interests at stake, the judgment could be among the most influential decisions ahead of the 2029 general elections. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sadalaw. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Supreme Court to Hear Fresh Plea on Electoral Bonds Transparency Sadalaw • August 10, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Chirag Paswan’s LJP-R Joins NDA Strategy Meeting Ahead of Bihar Assembly Elections Sadalaw • August 10, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Election Commission of India Delists 334 Unrecognised Political Parties Across the Country Sadalaw • August 10, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court to Hear Fresh Plea on Electoral Bonds Transparency Read More »

Allahabad High Court Rejects Rahul Gandhi’s Plea Challenging Summons Over Indian Army Remarks

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Allahabad High Court Rejects Rahul Gandhi’s Plea Challenging Summons Over Indian Army Remarks CBI Arrests NCLT Mumbai Deputy Registrar in ₹3 Lakh Bribery Scandal INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT BJP LEGAL CELL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT OFFICE OF MRS. SANGEETA YADAV INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT AERHE DEVELOPMENT FEDERATION Supreme Court Upholds Punjab and Haryana High Court Orders on Verandah Construction and Green Parking, Citing No UNESCO Violation Supreme Court to Hear Plea Next Week on Jamia Nagar Demolitions in Delhi Supreme Court Upholds Arrest Stay of BJP Minister Vijay Shah in Colonel Sofiya Qureshi Case, Ends MP High Court Proceedings Kerala High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Filmmaker Akhil Marar Over Alleged Seditious Remarks Supreme Court: No Blanket Ban on Witness Statement Disclosure Without Individual Threat Assessment Under UAPA Allahabad High Court Rejects Rahul Gandhi’s Plea Challenging Summons Over Indian Army Remarks Prabhat Kumar biltoria 31 May 2025 The Allahabad High Court has dismissed Rahul Gandhi’s plea against a defamation summons related to his controversial remarks about the Indian Army. Learn the key details of the case, the political backdrop, and its legal implications. Allahabad High Court Dismisses Rahul Gandhi’s Plea Over Indian Army Remarks Rahul Gandhi Faces Legal Setback Over Defamation Case In a significant development, the Allahabad High Court has rejected a petition filed by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, challenging a summons issued by a Lucknow court in a defamation case. The case pertains to Gandhi’s alleged derogatory remarks about the Indian Army during the 2022 Bharat Jodo Yatra. Details of the Court’s Decision Justice Subhash Vidyarthi dismissed the plea on its merits, affirming that the legal process must continue. The original summoning order was issued by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Alok Verma, requiring Rahul Gandhi to appear in court on March 24. What Sparked the Legal Action? Defamatory Comments About Indian Army The complaint stems from a statement made by Rahul Gandhi on December 16, 2022, referring to a clash between Indian and Chinese troops in Arunachal Pradesh on December 9, 2022. Gandhi had remarked that: “Chinese soldiers are beating up Indian Army personnel in Arunachal Pradesh.” This comment, interpreted as a criticism of the Government of India’s response to Chinese aggression, was deemed insulting to the armed forces. Who Filed the Complaint? Lawyer Vivek Tiwari filed the defamation complaint on behalf of Uday Shankar Srivastava, a former director of the Border Roads Organisation (BRO) with a rank equivalent to that of an Army Colonel. Tiwari alleged that Gandhi’s comments were defamatory and harmed the dignity of the Indian Army. Broader Legal Context and Political Fallout Other Defamation Cases Against Rahul Gandhi Rahul Gandhi has been facing a series of legal battles over alleged defamatory statements: In January 2025, the Supreme Court of India stayed criminal defamation proceedings against him related to comments about Amit Shah, the Union Home Minister. In a 2018 speech, Gandhi referred to Shah as a “murder accused,” drawing backlash and legal action from Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Navin Jha. The Supreme Court also admonished Gandhi for calling Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, a key figure in Hindutva ideology, a “British collaborator.” The bench warned of suo motu contempt proceedings if similar remarks were repeated. Key Takeaways The Allahabad High Court has upheld the defamation summons against Rahul Gandhi. The case relates to his 2022 statement on Chinese troops confronting Indian soldiers in Arunachal Pradesh. Legal experts see this as part of a broader pattern of litigation involving political speech. The Supreme Court of India remains involved in several other related matters. Conclusion The dismissal of Rahul Gandhi’s plea by the Allahabad High Court marks another chapter in his ongoing legal and political battles. As the 2024–2025 political landscape heats up, such cases underscore the tension between freedom of expression and accountability for public statements, especially when they involve sensitive national issues like the Indian Army. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws WazirX Hack Explained: Legal Analysis and Cryptocurrency Security Lessons from India’s Biggest Crypto Breach WazirX Hack Explained: Legal Analysis and Cryptocurrency Security Lessons from India’s Biggest Crypto Breach Sadalaw • May 30, 2025 • Case law • No Comments State of West Bengal vs Union of India 2024: Supreme Court Judgment on CBI Jurisdiction and Consent Withdrawal under DSPE Act State of West Bengal vs Union of India 2024: Supreme Court Judgment on CBI Jurisdiction and Consent Withdrawal under DSPE Act Sada Law • May 27, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Rules Cheque Dishonour Is Not a Continuing Cause for Arbitration Under Section 138 NI Act Supreme Court Rules Cheque Dishonour Is Not a Continuing Cause for Arbitration Under Section 138 NI Act Sada Law • May 25, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Allahabad High Court Rejects Rahul Gandhi’s Plea Challenging Summons Over Indian Army Remarks Read More »

Non-Bailable Warrant Issued Against Rahul Gandhi in 2018 Defamation Case Over Amit Shah Remarks

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Supreme Court Acquits Murder Convict Citing Mental Illness and Article 21 Right to Defense Non-Bailable Warrant Issued Against Rahul Gandhi in 2018 Defamation Case Over Amit Shah Remarks Supreme Court to Hear Petition Against Two-Shift NEET PG 2025 Exam Format Next Week Delhi Judge Transferred Amid Bribery Allegations; Court Clerk Claims ACB Retaliation Plot Supreme Court Rules Cheque Dishonour Is Not a Continuing Cause for Arbitration Under Section 138 NI Act Supreme Court Urges Compounding in Cheque Bounce Cases: M/S New Win Export vs A. Subramaniam (2024) Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Professor for WhatsApp Status on Article 370 and Pakistan Independence Day YouTuber Jyoti Malhotra Arrested for Espionage: No Regrets Over Leaking Info to Pakistan ISI Supreme Court Halts Discharge of Woman IAF Officer Involved in Operations Sindoor and Balakot Amid PC Denial Dispute Supreme Court Quashes Gangster Act FIR Against SHUATS VC, Cites Abuse of Legal Process Non-Bailable Warrant Issued Against Rahul Gandhi in 2018 Defamation Case Over Amit Shah Remarks PRABAHAT KUMAR BILTORIA 25 May 2025 A non-bailable warrant has been issued against Congress MP Rahul Gandhi in a 2018 defamation case related to comments about Amit Shah. The case highlights ongoing legal troubles and political tensions between the Congress Party and BJP in India. Non-Bailable Warrant Issued Against Rahul Gandhi in Defamation Case Congress MP Rahul Gandhi is facing fresh legal trouble after a non-bailable warrant was issued against him in a long-standing defamation case. The MP-MLA court in Chaibasa, Jharkhand has ordered Gandhi to appear in person on June 26, 2025. His request for exemption from personal appearance was denied by the court. The Origin of the Defamation Case The case stems from a remark made by Gandhi during the 2018 Congress plenary session, where he criticized then BJP President Amit Shah. Gandhi allegedly stated that even a person facing “charges of murder” could become the head of the BJP. This statement triggered a complaint from BJP leader Pratap Katiyar, who argued that Gandhi’s comments defamed all BJP workers. Legal Journey: From CJM Court to MP-MLA Court On July 9, 2018, Katiyar filed a defamation suit in the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) court in Chaibasa. In February 2020, the case was transferred to the MP-MLA court in Ranchi following an order from the Jharkhand High Court. Later, the case was returned to the Chaibasa MP-MLA court. The magistrate took cognizance and summoned Gandhi, who also serves as the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha. Repeated Absences and Escalation of Legal Action Despite multiple court summons, Gandhi did not appear. Initially, a bailable warrant was issued. Gandhi appealed to the Jharkhand High Court to stay the warrant, but his plea was disposed of on March 20, 2024. As the Member of Parliament from Raebareli, Gandhi filed another request for exemption from personal appearance — which was also rejected. Court Takes Firm Stand with Non-Bailable Warrant The special MP-MLA court has now taken a stricter stance, issuing a non-bailable warrant against Rahul Gandhi. This move underlines the seriousness of the court’s expectations regarding personal appearances in high-profile political defamation cases. Conclusion This case adds to the growing list of legal hurdles for Rahul Gandhi and underscores the rising political friction between the Congress and BJP. With the next hearing scheduled for June 26, all eyes will be on whether Gandhi complies with the court order. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Supreme Court Acquits Murder Convict Citing Mental Illness and Article 21 Right to Defense Supreme Court Acquits Murder Convict Citing Mental Illness and Article 21 Right to Defense Sada Law • May 25, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Non-Bailable Warrant Issued Against Rahul Gandhi in 2018 Defamation Case Over Amit Shah Remarks Non-Bailable Warrant Issued Against Rahul Gandhi in 2018 Defamation Case Over Amit Shah Remarks Sada Law • May 25, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court to Hear Petition Against Two-Shift NEET PG 2025 Exam Format Next Week Supreme Court to Hear Petition Against Two-Shift NEET PG 2025 Exam Format Next Week Sada Law • May 25, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Non-Bailable Warrant Issued Against Rahul Gandhi in 2018 Defamation Case Over Amit Shah Remarks Read More »

False Claims of RSS Attack on Col. Sofiya Qureshi Go Viral, Police Confirm as Fake News

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today False Claims of RSS Attack on Col. Sofiya Qureshi Go Viral, Police Confirm as Fake News 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 False Claims of RSS Attack on Col. Sofiya Qureshi Go Viral, Police Confirm as Fake News MAHI SINHA 14 May 2025 A fake viral post on X falsely claimed that Indian Army officer Col. Sofiya Qureshi’s residence was attacked by the RSS in Karnataka. Here’s the truth behind the misinformation and what police have confirmed. Fake News on X Falsely Claims Attack on Col. Sofiya Qureshi A recent viral post on the social media platform X claimed that Colonel Sofiya Qureshi of the Indian Army was attacked by members of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) at her residence in Gokak taluk, Belagavi district, Karnataka. The post, which rapidly gained traction, was later confirmed as fake by local police authorities. Origin of the False Claim The misinformation originated from a user identified as Anees Uddin, who posted that Col. Qureshi and her son were attacked, their home set ablaze, and anti-Muslim hate speech was used. Another user, @JN_Araain, echoed the claims stating:“RSS hatred strikes again! The target was Col. Sophia Qureshi, a Muslim spokesperson and officer in the Indian Army…” This narrative spread using emotionally charged hashtags like #HindutvaHate, #RSSViolence, and #JusticeForSophia. Police Confirm the Reports Are False The Superintendent of Police for Belagavi, Dr. Bhimashankar Guled, and Additional SP SN Shruti confirmed the incident was fabricated.“It’s false information,” said SP Shruti. “The post originated from outside India, and we are tracking the source. The family has been provided security, and an investigation is ongoing.” Claims of Army Protection and Relocation to Delhi Fake posts also alleged that Col. Qureshi and her family had to relocate to Delhi under Indian Army protection due to continued threats. These claims were pushed by another user, @BattlesInsight, who asserted the family was under serious risk. Despite the fabricated nature of the reports, precautionary measures were taken. Security was deployed at the home of Col. Qureshi’s father-in-law, Gausasab Bagewadi, in Konnur village. Police Respond with Investigation and Protection In response to the viral post, Gokak Circle Police Inspector Suresh RB visited the site for a ground-level evaluation. Authorities have asked the family to avoid unnecessary public appearances while the inquiry continues. Colonel Sofiya Qureshi: A Trailblazer in the Indian Army Col. Qureshi gained national prominence during Operation Sindoor, India’s military response to the Pahalgam terror incident. She was a key spokesperson alongside Foreign Secretary Vikram Misri and Wing Commander Vyomika Singh. Her poised presence during press briefings marked a historic moment for women in Indian defense leadership. Support and Pride from Her Family Col. Qureshi is married to Colonel Tajuddin Bagewadi, and they have one child. Her family in Konnur village expressed immense pride in her achievements.“We were thrilled to see her on TV explaining the operation with such confidence and clarity,” said her father-in-law, Gausasab Bagewadi. The Importance of Verifying Information Online This incident underlines the critical need to verify information before sharing it on social media. False narratives not only spread fear and confusion but also put innocent individuals at risk. Always refer to official sources for updates and avoid engaging with unverified posts. Conclusion: Fighting Fake News with Facts The false claims surrounding Colonel Sofiya Qureshi and the alleged RSS attack are a stark reminder of how quickly misinformation can spread across platforms like X. Despite the emotional and divisive nature of the viral content, verified reports from law enforcement have confirmed the incident never occurred. As responsible digital citizens, it’s essential to critically evaluate online content, rely on credible sources, and report misinformation when encountered. By doing so, we help protect individuals’ reputations, uphold the truth, and contribute to a more informed and respectful digital ecosystem. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases False Claims of RSS Attack on Col. Sofiya Qureshi Go Viral, Police Confirm as Fake News False Claims of RSS Attack on Col. Sofiya Qureshi Go Viral, Police Confirm as Fake News Sada Law • May 14, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 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 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

False Claims of RSS Attack on Col. Sofiya Qureshi Go Viral, Police Confirm as Fake News Read More »

Waqf Amendment Bill Sparks Uproar: Opposition Moves Supreme Court Over Alleged Bias Against Muslims

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Waqf Amendment Bill Sparks Uproar: Opposition Moves Supreme Court Over Alleged Bias Against Muslims “NALSA Files PIL for Humanitarian Release of Aged and Sick Inmates from Indian Jails” Which law states that Aadhaar is required to operate bank accounts? Questions for the Supreme Court the Delhi government’s refusal to grant workers’ allowances Opening the Monument Examining the Long-Term Effects of the 1981 Case Francis Coralie v. Union Territory of Delhi on Individual Liberty and Indian Jurisprudence Rajya Sabha Adopts Bill 2025 for Waqf (Amendment) Destruction in Kancha Gachibowli ‘forest’ area depicts an ‘alarming picture’, says SC NCLT Rejects Insolvency Plea Against Zomato Over Payment Dispute Actor Hansika Motwani files a motion in the Bombay High Court to quash a FIR after being booked in a Section 498A case. Supreme Court slams Telangana CM for “making mockery” of anti-defection law Union Minister Kiren Rijiju: The Waqf Amendment Bill Is Prospective Rather Than Retrospective Waqf Amendment Bill Sparks Uproar: Opposition Moves Supreme Court Over Alleged Bias Against Muslims MAHI SINHA 07 Apr 2025 The opposition parties are concerned about the Waqf Amendment Bill, which aims to change the 1995 law controlling Waqf properties. New Delhi: As the contentious Waqf Amendment Bill seeks the President‘s approval after passing both Houses of Parliament, the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) has joined the Congress and Asaduddin Owaisi‘s AIMIM as the third major opposition party to take on the bill in the Supreme Court. Opposition parties contend that the proposed legislation, which aims to modify the 1995 law managing Waqf properties, is biased and threatens Muslims. AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan said in his plea that the government’s intervention violates minorities’ rights to run own institutions and that the amendment will diminish Muslims’ religious autonomy. Nonetheless, the government has insisted that the measure will help Muslim women and guarantee openness in the administration of Waqf properties. Mr. Khan contested the Waqf Amendment Bill’s constitutionality, claiming that it infringes upon multiple basic liberties of citizens, such as the freedom of equality, the management of religious matters, and the rights of minorities. He said that the measure violates minorities’ rights to run their religious and philanthropic organizations, restricts Muslims’ religious and cultural autonomy, and permits capricious presidential intervention. His suit comes after two other opposition MPs, Asaduddin Owaisi and Mohammad Jawed, of the Congress, filed identical objections. The law prejudices against Muslims by enforcing limits that are absent from the governance of other religious institutions, according to Mr. Jawed, a member of the joint parliamentary commission on the Waqf bill. The law’s provision allowing non-Muslims to serve on state boards and Waqf councils is one of the main points of contention. According to Mr. Owaisi, this is a serious constitutional infringement and isn’t the instance with the Hindu Endowment Board or the Jain Endowment Board. Speaking to NDTV yesterday, Mr. Owaisi claimed that the BJP is utilizing the vast majority in parliament to wage a war on Muslims by passing legislation that will ruin and take away all of their rights rather than reforms. BJP MP Ravi Shankar Prasad defended the bill, telling NDTV that it will increase transparency by holding Waqf boards responsible. He made it clear that no mosque or cemetery will be impacted in an effort to dispel concerns that the measure would seize Waqf sites. After a contentious debate between the opposition and treasury benches, the Lok Sabha passed the Waqf bill Thursday morning by 288 votes to 232. The Rajya Sabha then passed it with 128 votes in favor and 95 against. Following Friday’s weekly prayers, the bill’s approval triggered massive demonstrations in cities including Ahmedabad, Chennai, and Kolkata. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as sadalawpublications@gmail.com. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Waqf Amendment Bill Sparks Uproar: Opposition Moves Supreme Court Over Alleged Bias Against Muslims Waqf Amendment Bill Sparks Uproar: Opposition Moves Supreme Court Over Alleged Bias Against Muslims sadalawpublications@gmail.com • April 7, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments “NALSA Files PIL for Humanitarian Release of Aged and Sick Inmates from Indian Jails” “NALSA Files PIL for Humanitarian Release of Aged and Sick Inmates from Indian Jails” sadalawpublications@gmail.com • April 6, 2025 • Live cases • 1 Comment Which law states that Aadhaar is required to operate bank accounts? Questions for the Supreme Court the Delhi government’s refusal to grant workers’ allowances Which law states that Aadhaar is required to operate bank accounts? Questions for the Supreme Court the Delhi government’s refusal to grant workers’ allowances sadalawpublications@gmail.com • April 5, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Waqf Amendment Bill Sparks Uproar: Opposition Moves Supreme Court Over Alleged Bias Against Muslims Read More »

Get A Quote
Get A Quote