sadalawpublications.com

A DYNAMIC LAW JOURNAL

Menu

Public Interest Litigation

Telangana High Court Cancels Free Land Allotment to IAMC Hyderabad in Landmark Ruling

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Telangana High Court Cancels Free Land Allotment to IAMC Hyderabad in Landmark Ruling Court Orders FIR Against Zed News and News18 for Defamatory Reporting During Operation Sindoor in Jammu & Kashmir Delhi High Court Rules Arbitration Clause Doesn’t Automatically Override Civil Court Jurisdiction Supreme Court Affirms Right to Close Business Under Article 19 of Indian Constitution Bombay High Court Halts Aarey Forest Demolition: Legal Win for Environment and Tribal Rights Delhi High Court Orders Centre to Draft Deepfake Guidelines: Major Step for Digital Privacy and Free Speech in India Supreme Court Clears Uttarakhand’s Uniform Civil Code: A Historic Step Toward Gender Equality and Secular Law in India Supreme Court Reviews CAA Rules 2024: Fresh Petitions Challenge Citizenship Law on Constitutional Grounds Supreme Court Orders CBI Probe into ₹3,200 Crore Bihar Foodgrain Scam: Political Fallout and Fight Against Corruption INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT INTERVENOR LEGAL SOLUTIONS, NEW DELHI Telangana High Court Cancels Free Land Allotment to IAMC Hyderabad in Landmark Ruling PRABHAT KUMAR BILTORIA 1 JULY 2025 In a landmark ruling, the Telangana High Court cancelled the free land allotment to IAMC Hyderabad, citing legal violations and procedural lapses. Learn more about this precedent-setting case involving land law, PILs, and state accountability. Land Allotment to IAMC Declared Legally Invalid In a pivotal judgment, the Telangana High Court has revoked the allocation of 3.7 acres of prime land in Raidurg, Hyderabad, previously granted to the International Arbitration and Mediation Centre (IAMC). The court ruled the government’s decision—issued via a government order in December 2021—as legally untenable and made without proper procedure. The land, valued at approximately ₹350 crore, was handed over free of cost, triggering a legal challenge and a public interest litigation (PIL) questioning the legality of the grant. Public Interest Litigation Challenges Land Grant The case was initiated by lawyer Koti Raghuntha Rao through a PIL. He argued that IAMC, as a private trust, was ineligible to receive land without compensation under the provisions of the Telangana Urban Areas Act, 1975. The bench, comprising Justices K. Lakshman and K. Sujana, agreed with the petitioner. They highlighted that the land allocation bypassed key requirements, including cabinet approval and standard due diligence procedures. The justices emphasized, “Noble intentions cannot override statutory mandates.” Court Emphasizes Legal Procedure Over Discretion Despite IAMC’s influential supporters, including former Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana, the court concluded that the organization remains a private entity. It ruled that such trusts are not entitled to free land from the state. The judges cautioned that discretionary powers of the state must be exercised transparently and within the bounds of law—especially in the allocation of public resources like land. Government Order No. 126 Nullified The court officially revoked Government Order No. 126, nullifying the land allotment. However, it clarified that the IAMC’s role as a neutral body for dispute resolution would remain unaffected by this decision. IAMC trustee and former Supreme Court judge B. Sudarshan Reddy responded that IAMC would appeal the verdict in the apex court. A Win for Transparency and Rule of Law This judgment sets a powerful precedent in land governance and public accountability. It reinforces that even well-intentioned governmental actions must comply with the law, and discretionary authority should not bypass legal frameworks. By addressing procedural lapses and prioritizing legality, the Telangana High Court has sent a strong message in support of fairness, transparency, and responsible land allocation. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Telangana High Court Cancels Free Land Allotment to IAMC Hyderabad in Landmark Ruling Sada Law • July 1, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Court Orders FIR Against Zed News and News18 for Defamatory Reporting During Operation Sindoor in Jammu & Kashmir Sada Law • July 1, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Delhi High Court Rules Arbitration Clause Doesn’t Automatically Override Civil Court Jurisdiction Sada Law • July 1, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Telangana High Court Cancels Free Land Allotment to IAMC Hyderabad in Landmark Ruling Read More »

Supreme Court Slams Misuse of UP Gangsters Act, Demands Accountability from Uttar Pradesh Government

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Supreme Court Slams Misuse of UP Gangsters Act, Demands Accountability from Uttar Pradesh Government Delhi High Court Orders Ghadi Detergent to Remove Disparaging Surf Excel Remarks from Ads Supreme Court Petition Seeks Immediate Suspension of Air India’s Boeing Fleet Over Safety Concerns Supreme Court Refuses Urgent Listing of Hany Babu’s Bail Clarification Plea in Bhima Koregaon Case Supreme Court Clarifies Azure–PPL Copyright Stay: No Impact on Third Parties Bombay High Court Quashes 306 IPC FIR in Loan-Linked Suicide Case, Cites Lack of Instigation Punjab–Haryana High Court Rejects PIL Against Online Betting Ads, Citing Statutory Remedies Under Gambling Law Supreme Court Reserves Interim Order on Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025: Key Legal and Constitutional Highlights HDFC Bank CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan Moves Bombay HC to Quash FIR in ₹2 Crore Bribery Case Filed by Lilavati Trust IPS Officer’s Husband Arrested in ₹7.2 Crore BMC Redevelopment Scam: Mumbai EOW Crackdown Sparks Integrity Debate Supreme Court Slams Misuse of UP Gangsters Act, Demands Accountability from Uttar Pradesh Government KASHISH JAHAN 25 June 2025 The Supreme Court of India has reprimanded the Uttar Pradesh government for misuse of the UP Gangsters Act, raising crucial concerns about preventive detention, civil liberties, and legal reform in India. Supreme Court of India Slams Misuse of UP Gangsters Act In a significant move for the protection of civil liberties, the Supreme Court of India has strongly criticized the Uttar Pradesh government for its rampant misuse of the Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act. This landmark intervention could influence how preventive detention laws are enforced across the country. Widespread Abuse of Preventive Laws in Uttar Pradesh Multiple petitions filed in the Supreme Court exposed an alarming pattern: ordinary citizens—such as farmers, small traders, and activists—were charged under the UP Gangsters Act without any legitimate evidence of involvement in organized crime. Petitioners alleged that the Act had been weaponized to target political opponents, settle personal vendettas, and suppress dissent. Shockingly, data revealed that over 70% of those arrested under the Act were eventually acquitted or had charges dropped due to lack of evidence. Justice Sanjiv Khanna Raises Red Flags The bench, headed by Justice Sanjiv Khanna, voiced serious concern about the growing misuse of preventive laws. Originally designed to counter organized criminal activities, the law had been distorted to unjustly detain innocent civilians. The court directed the state government to submit a list of all cases filed under the Act over the past five years, along with the justification for each arrest. It also indicated that it may issue formal guidelines to restrict the arbitrary use of such draconian laws. Constitutional Implications and Fundamental Rights This case brings into sharp focus the conflict between national security interests and the fundamental rights enshrined under Part III of the Constitution of India. According to legal experts, the final ruling may clarify constitutional boundaries on the state’s power to implement preventive detention and provide stronger protections against wrongful incarceration. It also renews urgent calls for police reforms and greater judicial oversight of executive power. What Happens Next? The Supreme Court will revisit the matter in July 2025, at which point it will examine the data provided by the Uttar Pradesh government. Civil rights activists are optimistic that the case will lead to meaningful legal reform and greater transparency in the use of laws that enable preventive detention. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Supreme Court Slams Misuse of UP Gangsters Act, Demands Accountability from Uttar Pradesh Government Sada Law • June 25, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Delhi High Court Orders Ghadi Detergent to Remove Disparaging Surf Excel Remarks from Ads Sada Law • June 25, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Petition Seeks Immediate Suspension of Air India’s Boeing Fleet Over Safety Concerns Sada Law • June 25, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Slams Misuse of UP Gangsters Act, Demands Accountability from Uttar Pradesh Government Read More »

Supreme Court Petition Seeks Immediate Suspension of Air India’s Boeing Fleet Over Safety Concerns

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Supreme Court Petition Seeks Immediate Suspension of Air India’s Boeing Fleet Over Safety Concerns Supreme Court Refuses Urgent Listing of Hany Babu’s Bail Clarification Plea in Bhima Koregaon Case Supreme Court Clarifies Azure–PPL Copyright Stay: No Impact on Third Parties Bombay High Court Quashes 306 IPC FIR in Loan-Linked Suicide Case, Cites Lack of Instigation Punjab–Haryana High Court Rejects PIL Against Online Betting Ads, Citing Statutory Remedies Under Gambling Law Supreme Court Reserves Interim Order on Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025: Key Legal and Constitutional Highlights HDFC Bank CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan Moves Bombay HC to Quash FIR in ₹2 Crore Bribery Case Filed by Lilavati Trust IPS Officer’s Husband Arrested in ₹7.2 Crore BMC Redevelopment Scam: Mumbai EOW Crackdown Sparks Integrity Debate Bombay High Court Orders Strict Action Against Illegal Occupants in MHADA Transit Homes Ex-Lilavati Hospital Trustee Chetan Mehta Seeks Bombay High Court Relief in ₹1,243 Crore Fraud Case Supreme Court Petition Seeks Immediate Suspension of Air India’s Boeing Fleet Over Safety Concerns PRABHAT KUMAR BITLORIA 25 June 2025 A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed in the Supreme Court urges the immediate suspension of Air India’s Boeing fleet following a tragic crash and multiple safety concerns. The case highlights maintenance lapses, fake audits, and ongoing service issues despite Tata Group ownership. Supreme Court PIL Seeks Suspension of Air India Boeing Fleet After Fatal Crash On June 24, 2025, the Supreme Court of India received a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) demanding the immediate suspension of all Boeing aircraft operated by Air India. The plea follows a devastating Air India crash en route from Ahmedabad to London that killed 241 passengers and crew members, along with 29 people on the ground. Crash Triggers Public Outcry and Legal Action The petition was filed by advocate Ajay Bansal, who emphasized the urgent need for compliance with safety regulations and protection of passenger rights. The June 12 disaster has raised widespread concerns over the airworthiness of Air India’s Boeing fleet and the airline’s maintenance protocols. Personal Flight Experience Sparks Legal Initiative Ajay Bansal detailed his own unsatisfactory flight experience aboard Air India flight AI 127 from Delhi to Chicago on May 20, 2025. Despite booking Business Class, he and his spouse encountered malfunctioning air conditioning, broken in-flight entertainment, and defective seating until the aircraft reached cruising altitude. Even after filing a formal complaint, the airline provided only partial acknowledgment and offered ₹10,000 as compensation. The incident is cited as one of many recurring service failures plaguing the airline. Air India’s Ongoing Operational Issues Revealed The petition highlights that such service failures are not isolated incidents. Viral videos and social media posts consistently show evidence of poor maintenance and frequent malfunctions aboard Air India aircraft. The PIL argues that systemic issues persist despite the airline’s acquisition by the Tata Group in 2022. DGCA Report Exposes Falsified Safety Inspections A critical piece of evidence in the PIL is a report from the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA), which found that Air India fabricated data from internal safety audits. Thirteen reported inspections at key airports were proven false—lacking documentation, authorized signatures, or evidence of authority delegation. Shockingly, individuals listed as auditors were actually passengers on those flights. Call for Enforcement of Aircraft Safety Laws The petition urges strict enforcement of the Aircraft Act of 1934 and the Aircraft Rules of 1937. Bansal calls for immediate grounding of unfit aircraft, mandatory public disclosure of safety audits, and penalties for non-compliance. Additionally, the petition advocates for robust and frequent inspections of engines, airframes, and cabin systems to ensure regulatory compliance and passenger safety. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Supreme Court Petition Seeks Immediate Suspension of Air India’s Boeing Fleet Over Safety Concerns Sada Law • June 25, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Refuses Urgent Listing of Hany Babu’s Bail Clarification Plea in Bhima Koregaon Case Sada Law • June 25, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Clarifies Azure–PPL Copyright Stay: No Impact on Third Parties Sada Law • June 25, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Petition Seeks Immediate Suspension of Air India’s Boeing Fleet Over Safety Concerns Read More »

Punjab–Haryana High Court Rejects PIL Against Online Betting Ads, Citing Statutory Remedies Under Gambling Law

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Punjab–Haryana High Court Rejects PIL Against Online Betting Ads, Citing Statutory Remedies Under Gambling Law Supreme Court Reserves Interim Order on Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025: Key Legal and Constitutional Highlights HDFC Bank CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan Moves Bombay HC to Quash FIR in ₹2 Crore Bribery Case Filed by Lilavati Trust IPS Officer’s Husband Arrested in ₹7.2 Crore BMC Redevelopment Scam: Mumbai EOW Crackdown Sparks Integrity Debate Bombay High Court Orders Strict Action Against Illegal Occupants in MHADA Transit Homes Ex-Lilavati Hospital Trustee Chetan Mehta Seeks Bombay High Court Relief in ₹1,243 Crore Fraud Case INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CODITAS, PUNE LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT SARVAANK ASSOCIATES, BENGALURU LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT SULLAR LAW CHAMBERS, CHANDIGARH LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT PEOPLE PRIORITY HR PARTNERS, DELHI Punjab–Haryana High Court Rejects PIL Against Online Betting Ads, Citing Statutory Remedies Under Gambling Law KASHISH JAHAN 25 June 2025 The Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissed a PIL against online betting ads, emphasizing the need to follow statutory remedies like the Haryana Prevention of Public Gambling Act, 2025, and avoiding judicial overreach through misuse of PILs. High Court Upholds Statutory Path Over PIL in Gambling Ad Case A division bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court, led by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel, has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that aimed to ban online betting and opinion-trading advertisements under Indian gambling laws. The court emphasized that the recently enacted Haryana Prevention of Public Gambling Act, 2025 and other statutory remedies provide adequate legal avenues—making a PIL unnecessary and improper in this context. Statutory Remedy vs Extraordinary Jurisdiction The court reinforced a crucial constitutional principle: when effective statutory remedies exist, constitutional courts should not entertain PILs. Bypassing these legal mechanisms through PIL leads to judicial overreach and adds unnecessary burden to the court system. This decision promotes the importance of legislative procedures in addressing legal grievances. Misleading Online Betting Ads Under Scrutiny The PIL alleged that platforms such as YouTube, X (formerly Twitter), and other social media networks were running deceptive advertisements for online betting and opinion-trading platforms. The petitioners argued these ads violated gambling regulations by making false promises and operating without proper regulation. Key Parties and Stakeholders in the Case – Anuj Malik and others served as petitioners, raising concerns about misleading betting advertisements. – The bench included Chief Justice Sheel Nagu and Justice Sumeet Goel, presiding over the matter. – The State Government of Haryana underscored the relevance of the newly introduced Haryana Prevention of Public Gambling Act, 2025 as an effective statutory remedy. Court Decision and Legal Direction The court dismissed the PIL and advised the petitioners to file their grievances through proper statutory channels under the existing Act. The judgment highlighted the need for judicial restraint and reinforced that PILs should be reserved for scenarios lacking adequate legislative solutions. Broader Legal Impact and Public Importance This decision reiterates that PILs should not substitute structured legislative frameworks, especially when laws like the Haryana Prevention of Public Gambling Act exist to regulate the issue. The ruling protects the principle of separation of powers and discourages misuse of PILs that could divert valuable judicial resources. Constitutional Significance and Article 14 The High Court’s judgment supports Article 14 of the Indian Constitution, which ensures equality before the law. It underscores that all litigants must follow the same statutory processes and that constitutional jurisdiction should be reserved for matters of true constitutional importance—not routine legal complaints. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Punjab–Haryana High Court Rejects PIL Against Online Betting Ads, Citing Statutory Remedies Under Gambling Law Sada Law • June 25, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Reserves Interim Order on Waqf (Amendment) Act, 2025: Key Legal and Constitutional Highlights Sada Law • June 25, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments HDFC Bank CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan Moves Bombay HC to Quash FIR in ₹2 Crore Bribery Case Filed by Lilavati Trust Sada Law • June 25, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Punjab–Haryana High Court Rejects PIL Against Online Betting Ads, Citing Statutory Remedies Under Gambling Law Read More »

Punjab & Haryana High Court Warns Against Misusing PILs to Bypass Legal Remedies

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Punjab & Haryana High Court Warns Against Misusing PILs to Bypass Legal Remedies DGCA Issues Warning to Air India Over Pilot Fatigue Violations on International Flights Nagpur Police Launch Legally-Backed ‘Operation Thunder’ to Seize Drug Mafia Assets Supreme Court Halts Madras HC Order to Demolish Temple in Madurai Apartment Complex ED Bans Summons to Advocates Under New Law; Director’s Nod Needed for Exceptions Amid CHIL ESOP Probe CALL FOR MEMBERS BY DELHI JUDICIAL REFORMS COUNCIL LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT EKLAVYA INDIA FOUNDATION LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT SK SAPRA & CO., NOIDA LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT LEGAL SAVVY LEGAL JOB OPPORTUNITY AT UNITED & UNITED Punjab & Haryana High Court Warns Against Misusing PILs to Bypass Legal Remedies KASHISH JAHAN 23 June 2025 The Punjab and Haryana High Court reaffirms that Public Interest Litigations (PILs) should not bypass existing legal remedies, particularly in cases like online betting advertisements. Learn why the court cautions against PIL misuse. High Court Dismisses PIL on Online Betting Ads The Punjab and Haryana High Court recently dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that sought action against online betting advertisements. The court emphasized that the petitioner failed to use the legal remedy already provided under the Haryana Prevention of Public Gambling Act, 2025. It reiterated that PILs are not to be used as shortcuts when statutory paths are available. Judicial Reminder on the Purpose of PILs The court bench underscored that the PIL mechanism was established to give a voice to the voiceless and to address issues lacking formal legal solutions. When a specific law exists, such as gambling regulation under the Haryana Act, petitioners are required to utilize it first. According to the court, this approach maintains the sanctity of constitutional processes and avoids misuse of the PIL channel. Impact of Frivolous PILs on the Judicial System The judges expressed serious concerns over the increasing misuse of PILs. They stated that frivolous or misdirected PILs not only overburden the judiciary but also undermine the credibility of legitimate public interest causes. The court emphasized that misusing PILs for issues already covered by law takes away valuable court time from more pressing, genuine matters. Upholding Constitutional Discipline and Legal Remedies This ruling reinforces the core principle that constitutional and statutory remedies must be respected. Petitioners are expected to exhaust all existing legal pathways before invoking the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court. The court’s position aims to protect the true purpose of PILs — serving the public interest in matters where no legal remedy exists. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Punjab & Haryana High Court Warns Against Misusing PILs to Bypass Legal Remedies Sada Law • June 23, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments DGCA Issues Warning to Air India Over Pilot Fatigue Violations on International Flights Sada Law • June 22, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Nagpur Police Launch Legally-Backed ‘Operation Thunder’ to Seize Drug Mafia Assets Sada Law • June 22, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Punjab & Haryana High Court Warns Against Misusing PILs to Bypass Legal Remedies Read More »

Madras High Court Seeks Tamil Nadu’s Response on Facial Recognition in Policing Amid Privacy Concerns

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Delhi High Court Restrains Unauthorized Use of “TATA” Trademark in Domain Names Bombay High Court Halts BMC Demolition Over Alleged Illegal Structures Amid Procedural Dispute Madras High Court Seeks Tamil Nadu’s Response on Facial Recognition in Policing Amid Privacy Concerns Madras High Court Seeks Tamil Nadu Govt’s Response on PIL Challenging Facial Recognition in Policing Supreme Court Affirms Maternity Leave as Constitutional Right, Even for Third Child Supreme Court Grants Bail to Bengaluru Stampede Executives, Emphasizes Due Process and Fair Arrests Supreme Court Stays ₹317 Crore VAT Demand on Antrix, Safeguarding India’s Space Commerce Growth Supreme Court Upholds POCSO Case Against Judge, Reinforces Child Protection and Judicial Accountability Supreme Court Rules Land Registration Isn’t Proof of Ownership: Legal Documentation Still Essential Supreme Court to Decide on Consecutive Life Sentences: Landmark Case on Criminal Sentencing in India Madras High Court Seeks Tamil Nadu’s Response on Facial Recognition in Policing Amid Privacy Concerns   Kashish Jahan 16 June 2025 The Madras High Court has asked the Tamil Nadu Government to respond to a PIL challenging the use of facial recognition technology in policing. The case raises major concerns over privacy, surveillance, and legal safeguards in India. PIL Filed Against Facial Recognition Technology in Tamil Nadu The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu Government to respond to a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) questioning the legality of deploying Facial Recognition Technology (FRT) in law enforcement without clear legal safeguards. The petitioner argues that using FRT in policing violates Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantees the right to privacy. Privacy, Legality, and Mass Surveillance at the Core Lack of Legal Framework Raises Red Flags According to the PIL, the use of FRT by police authorities lacks statutory backing, making it unconstitutional. The concern is that in the absence of a robust legal framework, this technology could lead to mass surveillance, profiling, and data misuse, threatening fundamental rights. Court Seeks Detailed Government Response The court acknowledged that the case raises serious concerns related to privacy, state power, and the use of emerging surveillance technologies. The Tamil Nadu Government has been asked to file a comprehensive response within four weeks. A Crucial Test for Digital Rights and Constitutional Values This case is being seen as a landmark moment for digital rights in India, especially in the context of the Supreme Court of India’s historic right to privacy verdict. It highlights the urgent need for laws that regulate how new technologies are used in law enforcement. The judiciary now has a unique opportunity to define the boundaries of state surveillance in a constitutional democracy, ensuring that technological advancement does not come at the cost of civil liberties. Conclusion: The Future of Surveillance and Privacy in India The outcome of this case could shape how facial recognition technology is regulated across India. As surveillance tools become more common, public scrutiny and legal oversight are essential to uphold privacy rights, protect individual freedoms, and ensure accountability in policing technologies. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws Supreme Court Affirms Right to Anticipatory Bail Across States in Matrimonial Disputes: Priya Indoria v. State of Karnataka (2023) Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Rules on Governor’s Limited Discretion to Withhold Assent and Summon Punjab Legislative Assembly | State of Punjab v. Principal Secretary (2023) Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Judgment on Chargesheets: Not Public Documents, No Mandatory Online Upload by Investigating Agencies | Saurav Das v. Union of India (2023) Sada Law • June 13, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Madras High Court Seeks Tamil Nadu’s Response on Facial Recognition in Policing Amid Privacy Concerns Read More »

Madras High Court Seeks Tamil Nadu Govt’s Response on PIL Challenging Facial Recognition in Policing

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Madras High Court Seeks Tamil Nadu’s Response on Facial Recognition in Policing Amid Privacy Concerns Madras High Court Seeks Tamil Nadu Govt’s Response on PIL Challenging Facial Recognition in Policing Supreme Court Affirms Maternity Leave as Constitutional Right, Even for Third Child Supreme Court Grants Bail to Bengaluru Stampede Executives, Emphasizes Due Process and Fair Arrests Supreme Court Stays ₹317 Crore VAT Demand on Antrix, Safeguarding India’s Space Commerce Growth Supreme Court Upholds POCSO Case Against Judge, Reinforces Child Protection and Judicial Accountability Supreme Court Rules Land Registration Isn’t Proof of Ownership: Legal Documentation Still Essential Supreme Court to Decide on Consecutive Life Sentences: Landmark Case on Criminal Sentencing in India Supreme Court Grants Bail to Andhra Journalist Over Controversial TV Show Remarks NCLT Admits Gensol Engineering to Insolvency Process Amid SEBI Probe and ₹992 Crore Debt Madras High Court Seeks Tamil Nadu Govt’s Response on PIL Challenging Facial Recognition in Policing KASHISH JAHAN 16 June 2025 The Madras High Court has asked the Tamil Nadu government to respond to a PIL challenging the use of facial recognition technology in policing, citing concerns over privacy, legality, and mass surveillance in India. Madras High Court Seeks Government Reply on Facial Recognition in Policing The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu Government to submit its response to a public interest litigation (PIL) that challenges the legal validity of using facial recognition technology (FRT) in policing. The PIL argues that the deployment of FRT without proper safeguards violates the fundamental right to privacy under Article 21 of the Constitution and lacks statutory backing, making it potentially unconstitutional. Privacy, Legality, and Surveillance Under Scrutiny According to the petitioner, using facial recognition in law enforcement without clear legal frameworks can lead to mass surveillance, data profiling, and misuse of citizen information. The court recognized that the case raises serious constitutional concerns about surveillance and the extent of state powers in the digital era. The Madras High Court has asked the state to file a comprehensive response within four weeks, acknowledging the growing concerns about digital policing methods. A Defining Moment for India’s Digital Rights Landscape This PIL represents a critical moment for digital rights in India. With surveillance technologies becoming more prevalent, the judiciary is expected to outline clear boundaries for their use in a constitutional democracy. The petition draws strength from the landmark Supreme Court privacy ruling, which established the right to privacy as a fundamental right. Any policy that enables FRT in public policing without legislative oversight may contradict this legal precedent. Implications for Future Use of Facial Recognition in India The outcome of this case could reshape how technologies like FRT are regulated in India. As concerns over data protection, misuse, and ethical AI continue to rise, this legal challenge pushes for a robust statutory framework that prioritizes individual rights over unchecked surveillance. It also reinforces the role of the judiciary in balancing technological advancement with constitutional liberties, ensuring that innovation does not come at the cost of civil freedoms. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Madras High Court Seeks Tamil Nadu’s Response on Facial Recognition in Policing Amid Privacy Concerns Sada Law • June 16, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Madras High Court Seeks Tamil Nadu Govt’s Response on PIL Challenging Facial Recognition in Policing Sada Law • June 16, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Affirms Maternity Leave as Constitutional Right, Even for Third Child Sada Law • June 16, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Madras High Court Seeks Tamil Nadu Govt’s Response on PIL Challenging Facial Recognition in Policing Read More »

Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CLLRA NLU, DELHI Chief Justice of India Warns Against Judicial Terrorism Amid Government Overreach Concerns Supreme Court Rules Unregistered Sale Agreement Cannot Confer Title Despite Later Registration Kerala High Court Upholds Convict’s Right to Support Child’s Education During Parole Madras High Court Orders ‘No Caste, No Religion’ Certificates for Willing Applicants LEGAL INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT ALL INDIA FOOTBALL FEDERATION, DELHI INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT DKL ADVOCATES INTERNSHIP OPPORTUNITY AT CHAMBER OF ADV. ADITYA LELE, MUMBAI JOB OPPORTUNITY AT ZEUS LAW ASSOCIATES Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions Kashish jahan 13 June 2025 Delhi High Court dismisses PIL filed by AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan against Batla House demolitions by DDA. Court allows individual petitions, emphasizing judicial caution in public interest litigations. Introduction: Overview of the Delhi High Court’s Decision On June 11, 2025, the Delhi High Court dismissed the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by AAP MLA Amanatullah Khan, which challenged the Delhi Development Authority (DDA)-led demolitions in Batla House. The court allowed the withdrawal of the PIL and declined to issue any broad stay orders on the demolition process. Background: The PIL and Allegations of Arbitrary Demolitions The PIL alleged that the DDA’s demolition drives in Batla House were arbitrary and affected local residents without following due legal procedures. Amanatullah Khan argued that the demolitions violated residents’ rights and called for judicial intervention to halt further demolitions. Court’s Rationale: Importance of Specificity in PILs The Delhi High Court emphasized that Public Interest Litigations must be specific and focused rather than broad-based. The bench noted that existing Supreme Court of India guidelines regulate demolition procedures. Many affected individuals had already approached the court through individual petitions seeking relief. The court highlighted that PILs should not replace focused legal action by aggrieved parties and should only be entertained when there are clear, demonstrable violations of rights. Outcome: PIL Withdrawal and Future Legal Options The PIL filed by Amanatullah Khan was formally withdrawn and dismissed by the court. No stay or court orders were issued to stop the ongoing demolitions in Batla House. However, residents and affected parties remain free to file individual petitions for relief as needed. Conclusion: Judicial Discipline in Public Interest Litigation This decision reaffirms the judiciary’s cautious approach to PILs, ensuring they are used appropriately to protect genuine public interest. The Delhi High Court’s ruling serves as a reminder that broad-based litigations lacking specific grievances may not receive court intervention, encouraging individuals to seek targeted legal remedies. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Case Laws Supreme Court Mandates “Support Persons” for Child Victims Under POCSO Act in Bachpan Bachao Case Sada Law • June 11, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Rules Section 6A Unconstitutional with Retrospective Effect in CBI v. R.R. Kishore Judgment Sada Law • June 11, 2025 • Case law • No Comments Supreme Court Judgment on Cancellation of Default Bail After Chargesheet Filing in Serious Offence Cases – State Through CBI v. T. Gangi Reddy (2023) Sada Law • June 11, 2025 • Case law • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Delhi High Court Dismisses PIL on Batla House Demolitions; Allows Individual Petitions Read More »

Delhi High Court Rejects PIL Over Illegal Construction Near Mehrauli Gurdwara, Cites Lack of Locus Standi

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Delhi High Court Rejects PIL Over Illegal Construction Near Mehrauli Gurdwara, Cites Lack of Locus Standi Supreme Court Directs High Courts to Regularize Court Managers as Permanent Staff Delhi High Court Urges Swift COVID-19 Testing Guidelines to Tackle Infection Surge Supreme Court Clarifies Section 102(3) CrPC: Delay in Reporting Seizure Does Not Invalidate It – Shento Varghese v. Julfikar Husen (2024) Supreme Court Rules Bail Cancellation Requires Just Cause, Protects Personal Liberty Supreme Court Issues Notice on Son’s Plea Against Assam Police for Illegal Detention and Deportation to Bangladesh Woman Faces Criminal Charges for Concealing ₹10 Lakh in Divorce Settlement in Delhi NEET-PG 2025 Postponed: Supreme Court Directs Single-Shift Exam for Transparency and Fairness Allahabad High Court Upholds ₹273.5 Crore GST Penalty on Patanjali Ayurved Kamal Haasan’s “Kannada from Tamil” Comment Sparks Legal Row and Film Boycott Threats Delhi High Court Rejects PIL Over Illegal Construction Near Mehrauli Gurdwara, Cites Lack of Locus Standi KASHISH JAHAN 05 June 2025 The Delhi High Court dismisses a PIL over alleged illegal construction near a historic gurdwara in Mehrauli, citing lack of locus standi. Learn why the court emphasized responsible use of public interest litigation. Overview: Public Interest Litigation Faces Scrutiny In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has dismissed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that challenged alleged unauthorized construction near a historic gurdwara in Mehrauli, Delhi. The Court highlighted that while protecting religious and heritage sites is crucial, judicial time must be reserved for genuine concerns backed by a legitimate connection. The Petitioner’s Concern: Unauthorized Structure Near a Heritage Site The PIL claimed that construction near the gurdwara was illegal and compromised the sanctity of the sacred site. Despite the religious and historical significance of the location, the Court questioned the petitioner’s standing in the case. Locus Standi: A Legal Requirement for Filing PILs Justice Mini Pushkarna emphasized the importance of locus standi — a legal principle that requires a person to have a direct and substantial interest in the issue at hand. The petitioner was found to have no personal stake — not being a nearby resident nor part of the gurdwara’s management. The Court labeled the PIL as frivolous and speculative. Court’s Decision: Petition Dismissed with Penalty Given the lack of locus standi, the High Court dismissed the case and imposed a penalty of ₹50,000 on the petitioner. The judgment underscored that the courts must not be used for baseless or attention-seeking activism. Importance of Judicial Discipline in PILs This ruling serves as a strong precedent emphasizing that PILs must be sincere and supported by a valid personal connection. The Court reiterated that while it remains committed to safeguarding public and heritage interests, frivolous cases waste judicial resources and undermine the purpose of public interest litigation. Conclusion: Respecting the Sanctity of Legal Proceedings The dismissal sends a clear message: the judicial system is not a platform for loosely framed or speculative petitions. PILs are powerful tools in a democracy, but their misuse can disrupt justice. For those not directly affected, it’s vital to understand the limits of legal intervention. 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 Rejects PIL Over Illegal Construction Near Mehrauli Gurdwara, Cites Lack of Locus Standi Delhi High Court Rejects PIL Over Illegal Construction Near Mehrauli Gurdwara, Cites Lack of Locus Standi Sada Law • June 5, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Supreme Court Directs High Courts to Regularize Court Managers as Permanent Staff Supreme Court Directs High Courts to Regularize Court Managers as Permanent Staff Sada Law • June 5, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Delhi High Court Urges Swift COVID-19 Testing Guidelines to Tackle Infection Surge Delhi High Court Urges Swift COVID-19 Testing Guidelines to Tackle Infection Surge Sada Law • June 5, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Delhi High Court Rejects PIL Over Illegal Construction Near Mehrauli Gurdwara, Cites Lack of Locus Standi Read More »

Supreme Court Weighs Shift from Five-Year to Four-Year Law Degree Citing NEP 2020

Leave a Comment / Live cases /

Trending Today Supreme Court Weighs Shift from Five-Year to Four-Year Law Degree Citing NEP 2020 India-Pakistan Agree to Full and Immediate Ceasefire After U.S. Mediation, Confirms Donald Trump Suspected Drone Debris Found in Jaisalmer After Pakistan’s Border Attacks Indian Army Jawan Murali Naik Killed by Pakistan Firing Near LoC in Jammu & Kashmir Supreme Court Strikes Down 2020 Environmental Clearance Exemption for Roads and Pipelines Constitutional Challenge to Demonetisation: Supreme Court Judgment on RBI Act and Legal Validity of 2016 Currency Ban Landmark Supreme Court Judgment Affirms Right to Die with Dignity in India: Eases Rules on Living Wills and Euthanasia Supreme Court Reforms ECI Appointment Process: Anoop Baranwal vs Union of India Judgment Explained Supreme Court Allows Ashish Mishra to Visit Lakhimpur Kheri Every Weekend Under Strict Conditions Rush to Trademark ‘Operation Sindoor’ Escalates Amid Ongoing Conflict, with Reliance and Others Filing Claims Supreme Court Weighs Shift from Five-Year to Four-Year Law Degree Citing NEP 2020 MAHI SINHA 11 May 2025 The Supreme Court is reviewing a PIL pushing for a four-year LL.B. degree in line with NEP 2020. Advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay challenges the five-year law course, citing financial burden and outdated structure. Supreme Court Reviews Plea Against Current Law Course Duration The Supreme Court of India is currently evaluating a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) that proposes replacing the traditional five-year LL.B. program with a four-year law degree, as encouraged by the National Education Policy 2020 (NEP 2020). Filed by Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, the PIL emphasizes that the extended law degree is financially burdensome and outdated. A bench comprising Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta heard the case and decided to club it with a related petition concerning a one-year LL.M. program. Advocate Upadhyay Challenges Educational Intent of Five-Year LL.B. According to Advocate Upadhyay, the five-year integrated LL.B. course was designed more for profit than educational benefit. He argued that its duration doesn’t necessarily reflect a student’s legal competence. His petition also recommends the formation of a Legal Education Commission or an Expert Committee—comprising jurists, retired judges, advocates, professors, and scholars—to reassess and reform legal education, including both LL.B. and LL.M. courses. Bar Council of India Yet to Respond to NEP Guidelines Citing the provisions of NEP 2020, Upadhyay claimed that the Bar Council of India (BCI) has yet to align legal education with the recommended four-year structure. He emphasized that this inaction contradicts the policy’s aim of streamlined professional education. Senior Advocate Vikas Singh Raises Socioeconomic Concerns Representing the petitioner, Vikas Singh shared a personal anecdote in court—his yoga instructor is unable to afford a five-year law education for his daughter. He underscored the economic strain caused by prolonged academic timelines. Justice Vikram Nath suggested that the matter be referred to the Bar Council for consultation and agreed to merge the petition with the ongoing one-year LL.M. case, currently before Justice Surya Kant. Previous Attempts to Reduce Law Course Duration This isn’t Upadhyay’s first legal push for education reform. He previously requested a switch from a five-year course to a three-year post-Class 12 LL.B., which the Supreme Court rejected in April 2024. Then-Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud remarked, “We need mature people coming into the profession.” Despite this, concerns over affordability and disproportionate course load persist. The petitioner argues that middle-class and lower-income families bear the brunt of extended education, delaying financial independence for aspiring lawyers by two years. Conclusion: Legal Education Reform at a Crossroads The debate surrounding the duration and structure of legal education in India is gaining momentum. As the Supreme Court deliberates on whether to align the LL.B. program with NEP 2020, the outcome could redefine the academic and professional landscape for future lawyers. Whether or not the Court mandates reform, the discussion highlights an urgent need to balance academic rigor, financial accessibility, and practical relevance in India’s legal education system. Leave a Reply Cancel Reply Logged in as Sada Law. Edit your profile. Log out? Required fields are marked * Message* Live Cases Supreme Court Weighs Shift from Five-Year to Four-Year Law Degree Citing NEP 2020 Supreme Court Weighs Shift from Five-Year to Four-Year Law Degree Citing NEP 2020 Sada Law • May 11, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments India-Pakistan Agree to Full and Immediate Ceasefire After U.S. Mediation, Confirms Donald Trump India-Pakistan Agree to Full and Immediate Ceasefire After U.S. Mediation, Confirms Donald Trump Sada Law • May 11, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments Suspected Drone Debris Found in Jaisalmer After Pakistan’s Border Attacks Suspected Drone Debris Found in Jaisalmer After Pakistan’s Border Attacks Sada Law • May 10, 2025 • Live cases • No Comments 1 2 3 … 5 Next »

Supreme Court Weighs Shift from Five-Year to Four-Year Law Degree Citing NEP 2020 Read More »

Get A Quote
Get A Quote