The Bombay High Court has pulled up the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over its action against pharmaceutical company Cadila Pharmaceuticals, questioning the manner in which the regulator exercised its powers while restricting the sale and distribution of medicines worth around Rs&nbsp;2.45 crore. The case relates to Cadila’s Aciloc range of medicines&nbsp;and concerns raised by the FDA over similarities in the branding and packaging of different variants.<h3>What triggered the FDA action?</h3>The dispute followed FDA inspections conducted on 9 and 10 July&nbsp;at Cadila-linked carrying and forwarding agent warehouses in Pune, Nagpur and Bhiwandi. The regulator raised concerns over four products — Aciloc 150, Aciloc 300, Aciloc 150 Plus and Aciloc 300 Plus. The FDA’s concern was that while Aciloc 150 and Aciloc 300 contain ranitidine, the “Plus” variants contain famotidine, a different active pharmaceutical ingredient.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/maharashtra-doctors-end-strike-after-bombay-high-court-intervention-1786025843446">Maharashtra doctors end strike after Bombay High Court intervention</a>&nbsp;However, the branding and packaging of the products were considered sufficiently similar by the regulator to potentially cause confusion among doctors, pharmacists or patients. The FDA subsequently restricted the sale and distribution of the affected stock and also directed that the products be recalled from the market. The value of the stock covered by the stop-sale action was approximately Rs&nbsp;2.45 crore.<h3>Why did Cadila approach the court?</h3>Cadila challenged the FDA's action before the Bombay High Court, arguing that the regulator had taken the drastic step without first giving the company an opportunity to explain its position. During the hearing, the court questioned whether the FDA could take such action first and hear the pharmaceutical company later. The bench stressed that regulatory powers, even when exercised in the interest of public health, must be used judiciously and with due process.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/bombay-hc-orders-takedown-of-allegedly-defamatory-posts-on-nitin-gadkari-1785915567695">Bombay HC orders takedown of allegedly defamatory posts on Nitin Gadkari</a>&nbsp;Following the court's intervention, the FDA agreed to revoke the earlier orders, issue show-cause notices to Cadila, hear the company's response and subsequently pass a reasoned order. The court's intervention does not&nbsp;amount to a clean chit for Cadila. The FDA can still take action after completing the required procedure. The case comes amid Maharashtra FDA Commissioner Tukaram Mundhe's intensified enforcement drive, and could add to the wider debate over whether aggressive regulatory action is being balanced with procedural safeguards.

The Bombay HC slammed the Maharashtra FDA over its "drastic" action on Cadila Pharma, emphasising that powers must be exercised with propriety. 

The Bombay High Court has pulled up the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) over its action against pharmaceutical company Cadila Pharmaceuticals, questioning the manner in which the regulator exercised its powers while restricting the sale and distribution of medicines worth around Rs 2.45 crore. The case relates to Cadila’s Aciloc range of medicines and concerns raised by the FDA over similarities in the branding and packaging of different variants. What triggered the FDA action? The dispute followed FDA inspections conducted on 9 and 10 July at Cadila-linked carrying and forwarding agent warehouses in Pune, Nagpur and Bhiwandi. The regulator raised concerns over four products — Aciloc 150, Aciloc 300, Aciloc 150 Plus and Aciloc 300 Plus. The FDA’s concern was that while Aciloc 150 and Aciloc 300 contain ranitidine, the “Plus” variants contain famotidine, a different active pharmaceutical ingredient. Also read: Maharashtra doctors end strike after Bombay High Court intervention However, the branding and packaging of the products were considered sufficiently similar by the regulator to potentially cause confusion among doctors, pharmacists or patients. The FDA subsequently restricted the sale and distribution of the affected stock and also directed that the products be recalled from the market. The value of the stock covered by the stop-sale action was approximately Rs 2.45 crore. Why did Cadila approach the court? Cadila challenged the FDA's action before the Bombay High Court, arguing that the regulator had taken the drastic step without first giving the company an opportunity to explain its position. During the hearing, the court questioned whether the FDA could take such action first and hear the pharmaceutical company later. The bench stressed that regulatory powers, even when exercised in the interest of public health, must be used judiciously and with due process. Also read: Bombay HC orders takedown of allegedly defamatory posts on Nitin Gadkari Following the court's intervention, the FDA agreed to revoke the earlier orders, issue show-cause notices to Cadila, hear the company's response and subsequently pass a reasoned order. The court's intervention does not amount to a clean chit for Cadila. The FDA can still take action after completing the required procedure. The case comes amid Maharashtra FDA Commissioner Tukaram Mundhe's intensified enforcement drive, and could add to the wider debate over whether aggressive regulatory action is being balanced with procedural safeguards.

The Bombay HC slammed the Maharashtra FDA over its "drastic" action on Cadila Pharma, emphasising that powers must be exercised with propriety.

Bombay HC pulls up Maharashtra FDA over Cadila drug ban, says powers must be used judiciously

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Wednesday directed social media platforms, including X and Meta, to remove all content, including AI-generated material, allegedly defaming Union Road Transport and Highways Minister Nitin Gadkari over claims related to ethanol-blended petrol.The court also instructed the platforms to disclose details of the users or accounts responsible for uploading and circulating the disputed content, allowing the petitioner to pursue legal action against those behind the posts.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/why-are-indians-being-forced-to-buy-e20-and-can-t-choose-normal-petrol-e10-government-finally-answers-1783731750234">Why are Indians being forced to buy E20 petrol? Government finally answers | WION Decodes</a>The directions came during the hearing of a petition filed by Gadkari, who alleged that fabricated and misleading content was being widely shared on social media. According to the petition, the posts falsely attributed statements to the Union minister on ethanol-blended petrol and included AI-generated and manipulated content that could mislead the public and tarnish his reputation.Taking note of the allegations, the High Court ordered that the disputed material be taken down from social media platforms. It further directed X and Meta to provide details of the uploaders of the content as part of the ongoing proceedings.The case comes amid increasing concerns over the misuse of artificial intelligence to generate convincing fake videos, images and audio that can spread rapidly online. Experts have repeatedly warned that AI-generated misinformation poses growing challenges for governments, courts and technology companies, particularly during politically sensitive periods and on issues involving public figures.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-hardeep-puri-defends-e20-petrol-dismisses-mileage-engine-health-criticism-as-make-believe-narrative-1783050765587">India: Hardeep Puri admits E20 petrol may reduce mileage, but dismisses widespread criticism as ‘make-believe narrative’</a>The proceedings also underscore the growing legal responsibility of social media platforms in responding to complaints involving alleged defamation and synthetic media.The matter will be heard further after the platforms comply with the High Court's directions and submit details of the accounts that uploaded the allegedly defamatory material.

Bombay HC orders takedown of allegedly defamatory posts on Nitin Gadkari

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Wednesday directed social media platforms, including X and Meta, to remove all content, including AI-generated material, allegedly defaming Union Road Transport and Highways Minister Nitin Gadkari over claims related to ethanol-blended petrol. The court also instructed the platforms to disclose details of the users or accounts responsible for uploading and circulating the disputed content, allowing the petitioner to pursue legal action against those behind the posts. Also read | Why are Indians being forced to buy E20 petrol? Government finally answers | WION Decodes The directions came during the hearing of a petition filed by Gadkari, who alleged that fabricated and misleading content was being widely shared on social media. According to the petition, the posts falsely attributed statements to the Union minister on ethanol-blended petrol and included AI-generated and manipulated content that could mislead the public and tarnish his reputation. Taking note of the allegations, the High Court ordered that the disputed material be taken down from social media platforms. It further directed X and Meta to provide details of the uploaders of the content as part of the ongoing proceedings. The case comes amid increasing concerns over the misuse of artificial intelligence to generate convincing fake videos, images and audio that can spread rapidly online. Experts have repeatedly warned that AI-generated misinformation poses growing challenges for governments, courts and technology companies, particularly during politically sensitive periods and on issues involving public figures. Also read | India: Hardeep Puri admits E20 petrol may reduce mileage, but dismisses widespread criticism as ‘make-believe narrative’ The proceedings also underscore the growing legal responsibility of social media platforms in responding to complaints involving alleged defamation and synthetic media. The matter will be heard further after the platforms comply with the High Court's directions and submit details of the accounts that uploaded the allegedly defamatory material.

Bombay HC orders takedown of allegedly defamatory posts on Nitin Gadkari

Mumbai:&nbsp;Maharashtra's sweeping food safety crackdown has taken an unprecedented turn, with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspecting canteens inside the Bombay High Court after judges questioned whether the regulator was unfairly targeting private restaurants while sparing government-run establishments.The inspections found violations at all three canteens, underscoring the court's observation that food safety standards must be enforced uniformly, irrespective of whether an establishment is privately or government-operated.<h2>Why the High Court stepped in</h2>The inspections stem from hearings on petitions filed by restaurant and hotel owners challenging the FDA's recent suspension of licences as part of its statewide crackdown on food safety violations.During the hearing, a Bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge&nbsp;and Justice Gautam Ankhad&nbsp;questioned whether the regulator's enforcement drive was limited to private eateries while government and semi-government canteens escaped similar scrutiny.The Bench observed that canteens operating inside institutions such as the High Court and Mantralaya serve judges, lawyers, government employees and members of the public, making compliance with food safety laws equally important.The court directed the FDA to inspect canteens operating in government and semi-government establishments, including those within the Bombay High Court and Mantralaya, and submit its findings before the court.Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/bollywood/bigg-boss-17-and-dhurandhar-fame-ayesha-khan-detained-by-police-during-protest-in-mumbai-1784725435793">'Why was I detained?': Dhurandhar actress Ayesha Khan questions Mumbai police after brief custody during protest</a><h2>What the FDA found</h2>Acting on the court's directions, FDA teams inspected three canteens inside the Bombay High Court complex.Two canteens were found operating without mandatory licences issued by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) and were directed to immediately cease operations.A third canteen, which possessed a valid FSSAI licence, was issued an improvement notice after inspectors identified hygiene and compliance deficiencies that require corrective action.<h2>FDA assures court of uniform enforcement</h2>Responding to the court's concerns, Maharashtra FDA Commissioner Tukaram Mundhe&nbsp;assured the Bench that the regulator would extend its inspections to government and semi-government establishments and that no institution would be exempt from food safety laws.Following the court's directions, the FDA informed the Bench that inspections had been conducted at the High Court canteens and said similar checks would be carried out at government establishments, including the Mantralaya canteen, as part of the ongoing statewide drive.The commissioner maintained that the Food Safety and Standards Act applies equally to all food establishments, regardless of whether they are privately owned or run by government institutions.<h2>Crackdown enters a new phase</h2>Since taking charge as Maharashtra FDA Commissioner, Tukaram Mundhe has led one of the state's most aggressive food safety campaigns, with inspections across restaurants, hotels, clubs and other food establishments.&nbsp;Several businesses have faced licence suspensions or notices over alleged hygiene violations and non-compliance with food safety regulations.The department says it has conducted 1,131 inspections across Maharashtra—averaging more than 20 inspections every day.&nbsp; &nbsp;Officials say the drive has resulted in the seizure of food products worth Rs 50 crore, including 1.6 lakh litres of allegedly adulterated milk, suspension of licences of 56 restaurants and the invocation of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) against organised gutkha syndicates.

Bombay High Court canteens were inspected after judges questioned whether Maharashtra FDA was targeting only private eateries. Violations were found at all three.

Mumbai: Maharashtra's sweeping food safety crackdown has taken an unprecedented turn, with the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) inspecting canteens inside the Bombay High Court after judges questioned whether the regulator was unfairly targeting private restaurants while sparing government-run establishments. The inspections found violations at all three canteens, underscoring the court's observation that food safety standards must be enforced uniformly, irrespective of whether an establishment is privately or government-operated. Why the High Court stepped in The inspections stem from hearings on petitions filed by restaurant and hotel owners challenging the FDA's recent suspension of licences as part of its statewide crackdown on food safety violations. During the hearing, a Bench of Acting Chief Justice Ravindra Ghuge and Justice Gautam Ankhad questioned whether the regulator's enforcement drive was limited to private eateries while government and semi-government canteens escaped similar scrutiny. The Bench observed that canteens operating inside institutions such as the High Court and Mantralaya serve judges, lawyers, government employees and members of the public, making compliance with food safety laws equally important. The court directed the FDA to inspect canteens operating in government and semi-government establishments, including those within the Bombay High Court and Mantralaya, and submit its findings before the court. Also Read: 'Why was I detained?': Dhurandhar actress Ayesha Khan questions Mumbai police after brief custody during protest What the FDA found Acting on the court's directions, FDA teams inspected three canteens inside the Bombay High Court complex. Two canteens were found operating without mandatory licences issued by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) and were directed to immediately cease operations. A third canteen, which possessed a valid FSSAI licence, was issued an improvement notice after inspectors identified hygiene and compliance deficiencies that require corrective action. FDA assures court of uniform enforcement Responding to the court's concerns, Maharashtra FDA Commissioner Tukaram Mundhe assured the Bench that the regulator would extend its inspections to government and semi-government establishments and that no institution would be exempt from food safety laws. Following the court's directions, the FDA informed the Bench that inspections had been conducted at the High Court canteens and said similar checks would be carried out at government establishments, including the Mantralaya canteen, as part of the ongoing statewide drive. The commissioner maintained that the Food Safety and Standards Act applies equally to all food establishments, regardless of whether they are privately owned or run by government institutions. Crackdown enters a new phase Since taking charge as Maharashtra FDA Commissioner, Tukaram Mundhe has led one of the state's most aggressive food safety campaigns, with inspections across restaurants, hotels, clubs and other food establishments. Several businesses have faced licence suspensions or notices over alleged hygiene violations and non-compliance with food safety regulations. The department says it has conducted 1,131 inspections across Maharashtra—averaging more than 20 inspections every day. Officials say the drive has resulted in the seizure of food products worth Rs 50 crore, including 1.6 lakh litres of allegedly adulterated milk, suspension of licences of 56 restaurants and the invocation of the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) against organised gutkha syndicates.

Bombay High Court canteens were inspected after judges questioned whether Maharashtra FDA was targeting only private eateries. Violations were found at all three.

Bombay High Court canteens inspected after judges question Maharashtra FDA's 'selective' crackdown

The fallout from the NEET paper leak continues to reshape India's examination system. In a major move, Maharashtra has established 23 special fast-track courts to hear 203 pending examination malpractice cases, including paper leaks, recruitment exam fraud, HSC cheating, and other examination-related offenses.

The decision follows widespread public outrage over the NEET paper leak controversy, which triggered nationwide student protests and renewed calls for stronger action against exam fraud.

The Bombay High Court has directed the newly constituted courts to make every effort to complete trials within three months of the filing of charge sheets, aiming to ensure faster justice.

NEET Paper Leak Crackdown | Maharashtra Launches 23 Fast-Track Courts For Exam Fraud Cases

The fallout from the NEET paper leak controversy continues to reshape India's examination system, with Maharashtra establishing 23 special fast-track courts to handle 203 pending exam malpractice cases.

The newly created courts will hear cases involving paper leaks, recruitment examination fraud, HSC examination cheating, and other forms of examination malpractice. The move follows widespread outrage over the NEET paper leak and aims to ensure faster justice in cases affecting millions of students.

The Bombay High Court has directed the special courts to make every effort to complete trials within three months of filing the chargesheet, significantly accelerating the judicial process.

The development comes after the Public Examinations (Prevention of Unfair Means) Amendment Bill, 2026 received Presidential assent. The amended law introduces stricter punishments, including five to ten years of imprisonment and fines of up to ₹50 lakh for those using unfair means. For service providers involved in examination fraud, the maximum fine has been increased from ₹1 crore to ₹5 crore, while the debarment period has been doubled from four years to eight years.

NEET Paper Leak Fallout | Maharashtra Sets Up 23 Fast-Track Courts To Hear 203 Exam Fraud Cases

The Bombay High Court has denied a woman's request for interim maintenance, noting that her earnings exceed her husband's income, and also flagging that his IT job could be at risk due to artificial intelligence. The woman, who lives in New Jersey in the United States, earns a monthly salary of Rs 8 lakh (nearly $8,700), surpassing her husband's income. The court noted that a higher cost of living overseas does not, on its own, justify a claim for interim maintenance. In response, a division bench of Justice Bharati Dangre and Justice Manjusha Deshpande rejected the woman's request demanding Rs 1 lakh per month as interim maintenance.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/shah-responsible-for-violence-rahul-gandhi-vows-to-raise-pellet-gun-use-in-parliament-1784988609798">'Shah responsible for violence': Rahul Gandhi vows to raise pellet gun use in Parliament</a> The woman has resided in the US since 2011 and works for Mark Infotech, a New Delhi-based IT solutions firm. Her husband is also employed in the IT industry. The court noted that rising competition within the sector, coupled with the increasing adoption of Artificial Intelligence, could pose a risk to his employment. Previously, a family court had also denied the woman's application for interim maintenance, but it had ordered the husband to pay Rs 25,000 towards litigation expenses. Meanwhile, the elder child remains in the custody of the father, and the younger child is in the mother's custody. Later, the woman had approached the High Court challenging the order of the family court.

The woman has lived in the US since 2011 and works for New Delhi-based IT firm Mark Infotech. Her husband, also in IT, could face job risks due to rising competition and growing AI adoption, the court noted.

The Bombay High Court has denied a woman's request for interim maintenance, noting that her earnings exceed her husband's income, and also flagging that his IT job could be at risk due to artificial intelligence. The woman, who lives in New Jersey in the United States, earns a monthly salary of Rs 8 lakh (nearly $8,700), surpassing her husband's income. The court noted that a higher cost of living overseas does not, on its own, justify a claim for interim maintenance. In response, a division bench of Justice Bharati Dangre and Justice Manjusha Deshpande rejected the woman's request demanding Rs 1 lakh per month as interim maintenance. Also read: 'Shah responsible for violence': Rahul Gandhi vows to raise pellet gun use in Parliament The woman has resided in the US since 2011 and works for Mark Infotech, a New Delhi-based IT solutions firm. Her husband is also employed in the IT industry. The court noted that rising competition within the sector, coupled with the increasing adoption of Artificial Intelligence, could pose a risk to his employment. Previously, a family court had also denied the woman's application for interim maintenance, but it had ordered the husband to pay Rs 25,000 towards litigation expenses. Meanwhile, the elder child remains in the custody of the father, and the younger child is in the mother's custody. Later, the woman had approached the High Court challenging the order of the family court.

The woman has lived in the US since 2011 and works for New Delhi-based IT firm Mark Infotech. Her husband, also in IT, could face job risks due to rising competition and growing AI adoption, the court noted.

Bombay HC denies maintenance plea of woman earning more than husband

In today's top India news:

Bombay High Court cancels the bail of Shiv Sena Corporation member Mahesh Mhatre in the assault case involving hospital staff.
Bulldozer action carried out against an office linked to TMC MP Abhishek Banerjee over alleged building violations.
Olympic medalists Mirabai Chanu and Neeraj Chopra to lead India's contingent at the 2026 Commonwealth Games opening ceremony.
Ayodhya Ram Temple Trust receives numerous applications for its first Chief Executive Officer amid donation misappropriation allegations.

Bombay HC cancels Shiv Sena leader's bail | Abhishek Banerjee office demolished | Commonwealth Games

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Monday delivered a sharp rebuke to the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), questioning why Mumbai’s roads continue to remain riddled with potholes despite years of judicial intervention and repeated civic promises.&nbsp;Hearing a public interest litigation on road safety during the monsoon, a division bench observed that the city’s deteriorating road conditions continue to endanger commuters and said it was time for the civic body to “wake up” after more than two decades of court monitoring.&nbsp;The judges remarked that travelling across Mumbai, from Dahisar to Fort, still involves navigating “hundreds of bumps”, raising concerns over the quality of road construction in India’s financial capital. They questioned why the city has failed to build durable roads comparable to those in other global metropolitan cities.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-supreme-court-allows-states-to-count-mail-in-ballots-that-arrive-late-trump-calls-it-tremendous-loss-1782758597695">US Supreme Court allows states to count mail-in ballots that arrive late; Trump calls it ‘tremendous loss’</a>&nbsp;The court also turned its focus to the recurring danger posed by open manholes during the monsoon. While the BMC informed the bench that protective safety grills have been installed beneath over 70,000 manhole covers, it admitted that more than 3,000 manholes are yet to be fitted with the protective mechanism.&nbsp;Expressing concern over recent fatalities linked to open drains and uncovered manholes, the bench sought a categorical assurance from the civic body that no citizen should lose their life due to such negligence this monsoon.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/yasin-malik-faces-trial-in-sarla-bhat-rape-murder-case-35-years-after-brutal-crime-instilled-fear-in-kashmiri-pandits-triggered-exodus-1782752930044">Yasin Malik faces trial in Sarla Bhat rape-murder case 35 years after brutal crime instilled fear in Kashmiri Pandits</a>&nbsp;During the hearing, the court also referred to the recent incident in which a civic employee fell into a chamber during an inspection by Mumbai Mayor Ritu Tawde. The BMC clarified that the employee had fallen into a water pumping station and not an open manhole, adding that the incident had been widely misrepresented.&nbsp;Seeking greater accountability, the High Court directed the BMC to file a detailed affidavit on the functioning of its pothole and open-manhole complaint mechanism. The civic body has also been asked to submit photographic evidence showing that complaints lodged by citizens have been resolved, along with details of FIRs registered in cases involving stolen manhole covers.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-refuses-urgent-hearing-of-ram-temple-petitions-saying-heavens-are-not-going-to-fall-1782739148242">Supreme Court refuses urgent hearing of Ram Temple petitions, saying, 'Heavens are not going to fall’</a>&nbsp;The bench also expressed displeasure over the delay in paying Rs 6 lakh compensation to the family of a doctor who died after falling into an uncovered manhole in Thane last year, directing the Thane Municipal Corporation to ensure payment before the next hearing.&nbsp;The matter has been posted for further hearing on July 6, when the BMC is expected to submit its compliance report on road safety measures, monsoon preparedness and pending directions issued by the court.

Hearing a public interest litigation on road safety during monsoon, a Bombay High Court division bench observed that the city’s deteriorating road conditions continue to endanger commuters and said it was time for the civic body to “wake up” after more than two decades of court monitoring.

Mumbai: The Bombay High Court on Monday delivered a sharp rebuke to the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC), questioning why Mumbai’s roads continue to remain riddled with potholes despite years of judicial intervention and repeated civic promises. Hearing a public interest litigation on road safety during the monsoon, a division bench observed that the city’s deteriorating road conditions continue to endanger commuters and said it was time for the civic body to “wake up” after more than two decades of court monitoring. The judges remarked that travelling across Mumbai, from Dahisar to Fort, still involves navigating “hundreds of bumps”, raising concerns over the quality of road construction in India’s financial capital. They questioned why the city has failed to build durable roads comparable to those in other global metropolitan cities. Also Read: US Supreme Court allows states to count mail-in ballots that arrive late; Trump calls it ‘tremendous loss’ The court also turned its focus to the recurring danger posed by open manholes during the monsoon. While the BMC informed the bench that protective safety grills have been installed beneath over 70,000 manhole covers, it admitted that more than 3,000 manholes are yet to be fitted with the protective mechanism. Expressing concern over recent fatalities linked to open drains and uncovered manholes, the bench sought a categorical assurance from the civic body that no citizen should lose their life due to such negligence this monsoon. Also Read: Yasin Malik faces trial in Sarla Bhat rape-murder case 35 years after brutal crime instilled fear in Kashmiri Pandits During the hearing, the court also referred to the recent incident in which a civic employee fell into a chamber during an inspection by Mumbai Mayor Ritu Tawde. The BMC clarified that the employee had fallen into a water pumping station and not an open manhole, adding that the incident had been widely misrepresented. Seeking greater accountability, the High Court directed the BMC to file a detailed affidavit on the functioning of its pothole and open-manhole complaint mechanism. The civic body has also been asked to submit photographic evidence showing that complaints lodged by citizens have been resolved, along with details of FIRs registered in cases involving stolen manhole covers. Also Read: Supreme Court refuses urgent hearing of Ram Temple petitions, saying, 'Heavens are not going to fall’ The bench also expressed displeasure over the delay in paying Rs 6 lakh compensation to the family of a doctor who died after falling into an uncovered manhole in Thane last year, directing the Thane Municipal Corporation to ensure payment before the next hearing. The matter has been posted for further hearing on July 6, when the BMC is expected to submit its compliance report on road safety measures, monsoon preparedness and pending directions issued by the court.

Hearing a public interest litigation on road safety during monsoon, a Bombay High Court division bench observed that the city’s deteriorating road conditions continue to endanger commuters and said it was time for the civic body to “wake up” after more than two decades of court monitoring.

‘Wake up: Bombay High Court pulls up BMC over Mumbai’s potholed roads, open manhole risks

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed before the Bombay High Court seeking a court-monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the plane crash that claimed the life of senior Maharashtra leader Ajit Pawar.The plea has added a fresh political and legal dimension to an incident that has already triggered widespread debate across the state. The petition was moved by RTI activist Ketan Tirodkar, who has alleged that several key questions surrounding the January 28 crash remain unanswered. The aircraft went down near Baramati, Pawar’s political stronghold, resulting in five fatalities.&nbsp;While preliminary inquiries are understood to be underway, the petitioner has argued that the circumstances of the crash warrant a deeper, independent probe under judicial supervision. In his plea, Tirodkar has called for the formation of an SIT comprising senior police officers, aviation experts, and former officials of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA).&nbsp;According to the petition, the inclusion of technical experts is essential to examine factors such as flight clearance records, aircraft maintenance logs, weather conditions, air traffic control communication, and compliance with safety protocols. The activist has contended that a transparent and technically sound investigation is crucial to maintain public confidence.&nbsp;Interestingly, the petition also names NCP MLA Rohit Pawar as a respondent. Rohit Pawar has publicly demanded greater transparency in the probe, making his inclusion in the plea a notable development. Political observers say this could further intensify the spotlight on the case.&nbsp;The tragedy has sparked sharp reactions across party lines in Maharashtra. Several opposition leaders have demanded that the probe be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), arguing that an independent central agency would ensure credibility.&nbsp;Meanwhile, others have urged restraint, stating that speculation should not precede official findings. The Bombay High Court is expected to hear the PIL in the coming days.&nbsp;&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-at-unhrc-says-pakistan-s-claims-reek-of-envy-notes-islamabad-must-be-living-in-la-la-land-video-1772084782376">India at UNHRC says Pakistan’s claims ‘reek of envy,’ notes Islamabad ‘living in la la land’ | Video</a>

The petition was moved by RTI activist Ketan Tirodkar, who has alleged that several key questions surrounding the January 28 crash remain unanswered. The aircraft went down near Baramati, Pawar’s political stronghold, resulting in five fatalities.

A Public Interest Litigation (PIL) has been filed before the Bombay High Court seeking a court-monitored Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the plane crash that claimed the life of senior Maharashtra leader Ajit Pawar. The plea has added a fresh political and legal dimension to an incident that has already triggered widespread debate across the state. The petition was moved by RTI activist Ketan Tirodkar, who has alleged that several key questions surrounding the January 28 crash remain unanswered. The aircraft went down near Baramati, Pawar’s political stronghold, resulting in five fatalities. While preliminary inquiries are understood to be underway, the petitioner has argued that the circumstances of the crash warrant a deeper, independent probe under judicial supervision. In his plea, Tirodkar has called for the formation of an SIT comprising senior police officers, aviation experts, and former officials of the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA). According to the petition, the inclusion of technical experts is essential to examine factors such as flight clearance records, aircraft maintenance logs, weather conditions, air traffic control communication, and compliance with safety protocols. The activist has contended that a transparent and technically sound investigation is crucial to maintain public confidence. Interestingly, the petition also names NCP MLA Rohit Pawar as a respondent. Rohit Pawar has publicly demanded greater transparency in the probe, making his inclusion in the plea a notable development. Political observers say this could further intensify the spotlight on the case. The tragedy has sparked sharp reactions across party lines in Maharashtra. Several opposition leaders have demanded that the probe be handed over to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), arguing that an independent central agency would ensure credibility. Meanwhile, others have urged restraint, stating that speculation should not precede official findings. The Bombay High Court is expected to hear the PIL in the coming days. Also read: India at UNHRC says Pakistan’s claims ‘reek of envy,’ notes Islamabad ‘living in la la land’ | Video

The petition was moved by RTI activist Ketan Tirodkar, who has alleged that several key questions surrounding the January 28 crash remain unanswered. The aircraft went down near Baramati, Pawar’s political stronghold, resulting in five fatalities.

SIT demand grows over Ajit Pawar plane tragedy; PIL filed in Bombay High Court

Fugitive businessman Vijay Mallya told the Bombay High Court that he does not know when he will return to India. Mallya said he has no definite date for his return, marking a fresh development in the long-running legal proceedings involving the former liquor baron.


Breaking: Vijay Mallya Tells Bombay Court He Has No Definite Date To Return To India | WION

Bombay High Court refused to let a young rape survivor to medically terminate her pregnancy. The decision came as she was 28-weeks pregnant, a stage at which the court ruled termination would constitute foeticide. A bench comprising of justice Ravindra Ghuge and justice Abhay Mantri based the order the findings of the medical board. The doctors opined that the foetus had no congenital abnormality or anomaly and noted a high probability of a live birth. However, the board also highlighted that the infant would require intensive medical support and treatment if born 12 weeks before the natural conclusion of the pregnancy.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/delhi-hc-suspends-kuldeep-sengar-life-sentence-unnao-rape-case-1766644718266">Unnao rape case- Why did Delhi HC suspend life sentence of Kuldeep Singh Sengar?</a>&nbsp;Under the country's Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, for abortion the legal limit is 24 weeks for rape survivors. And beyond that said time frame, termination is typically only permitted if there are substantial foetal abnormalities or an immediate threat to the mother's life. And this particular clause was ruled out in this case. According to the findings of the medical board, the foetus was said to be"normal" and the survivor's life was not in immediate physical danger; the court exercised its discretion to deny the plea.&nbsp;The judge said, "If the child is to develop deformities by a pre-term delivery, no childless couple would adopt such a baby. On the other hand, if the child is allowed to be born naturally, at least a well-developed child would be born naturally as it normally happens and would turn out to be a healthy baby. A childless couple would always be encouraged to adopt a well developed orphan baby.” The other option teh bench noted would be to perform foeticide. It further added that in a case similar to this, the Supreme Court declined the option to proceed with the option of foeticide. “&nbsp; &nbsp;

Under the country's Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, for abortion the legal limit is 24 weeks for rape survivors. And beyond that said time frame, termination is typically only permitted if there are substantial foetal abnormalities or an immediate threat to the mother's life. 

Bombay High Court refused to let a young rape survivor to medically terminate her pregnancy. The decision came as she was 28-weeks pregnant, a stage at which the court ruled termination would constitute foeticide. A bench comprising of justice Ravindra Ghuge and justice Abhay Mantri based the order the findings of the medical board. The doctors opined that the foetus had no congenital abnormality or anomaly and noted a high probability of a live birth. However, the board also highlighted that the infant would require intensive medical support and treatment if born 12 weeks before the natural conclusion of the pregnancy. Also read: Unnao rape case- Why did Delhi HC suspend life sentence of Kuldeep Singh Sengar? Under the country's Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, for abortion the legal limit is 24 weeks for rape survivors. And beyond that said time frame, termination is typically only permitted if there are substantial foetal abnormalities or an immediate threat to the mother's life. And this particular clause was ruled out in this case. According to the findings of the medical board, the foetus was said to be"normal" and the survivor's life was not in immediate physical danger; the court exercised its discretion to deny the plea. The judge said, "If the child is to develop deformities by a pre-term delivery, no childless couple would adopt such a baby. On the other hand, if the child is allowed to be born naturally, at least a well-developed child would be born naturally as it normally happens and would turn out to be a healthy baby. A childless couple would always be encouraged to adopt a well developed orphan baby.” The other option teh bench noted would be to perform foeticide. It further added that in a case similar to this, the Supreme Court declined the option to proceed with the option of foeticide. “

Under the country's Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, for abortion the legal limit is 24 weeks for rape survivors. And beyond that said time frame, termination is typically only permitted if there are substantial foetal abnormalities or an immediate threat to the mother's life.&nbsp;

'Foeticide': Bombay High Court denies abortion plea to 28-week pregnant rape survivor

The Bombay High Court has strongly reprimanded the Maharashtra government over its handling of malnutrition-related deaths in the state’s tribal regions, observing that “too little is being done” to address a crisis that continues to claim lives despite decades of policy interventions.&nbsp;The court’s remarks came while hearing public interest litigations or PILs highlighting the alarming number of deaths among infants, pregnant women, and lactating mothers in the Melghat tribal belt of Amravati district.&nbsp;According to data placed before the court, at least 115 deaths have been reported in the region, allegedly linked to malnutrition and related health complications.&nbsp;A division bench comprising Justices Ravindra V. Ghuge and Abhay Mantri expressed dissatisfaction with the state’s response, stating that merely presenting statistics or denying direct responsibility was insufficient.&nbsp;The judges stressed that the government must demonstrate seriousness, accountability, and urgency in tackling the deep-rooted causes of malnutrition rather than offering routine explanations.&nbsp;During the hearing, the state government acknowledged the reported deaths but argued that not all fatalities were caused solely by malnutrition. The government pointed to social factors such as early marriages, teenage pregnancies, poor maternal health, lack of awareness, and limited access to healthcare facilities as contributing causes. However, the court maintained that these issues only underline the failure of governance and welfare delivery mechanisms in vulnerable regions.&nbsp;Melghat, a predominantly tribal area, has long been synonymous with malnutrition-related deaths, particularly among children. Despite the presence of schemes such as the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), midday meal programmes, and nutrition missions, the region continues to struggle with food insecurity, poverty, inadequate medical infrastructure, and difficult terrain, which limit effective implementation.&nbsp;The High Court observed that the persistence of such deaths reflects systemic neglect and asked the government to move beyond paperwork. It directed authorities to identify the exact causes of deaths, strengthen on-ground monitoring, improve healthcare access, and ensure timely nutritional support to at-risk populations.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/after-trump-s-peace-board-invite-france-says-it-s-committed-to-un-charter-1768837481172">After Trump’s peace board invite, France says it's committed to UN charter</a>&nbsp;Calling for a zero-tolerance approach to malnutrition-related fatalities, the bench instructed the Maharashtra government to submit a detailed action plan outlining concrete measures to prevent further deaths. The court has scheduled the next hearing for February 27, by which time it expects a clear roadmap demonstrating meaningful intervention rather than assurances.&nbsp;The case has once again drawn attention to the long-standing crisis of malnutrition in India’s tribal belts, raising uncomfortable questions about policy implementation, social inequality, and the state’s responsibility toward its most marginalised citizens

According to data placed before the court, at least 115 deaths have been reported in the Melghat tribal belt of Amravati district, allegedly linked to malnutrition and related health complications.

The Bombay High Court has strongly reprimanded the Maharashtra government over its handling of malnutrition-related deaths in the state’s tribal regions, observing that “too little is being done” to address a crisis that continues to claim lives despite decades of policy interventions. The court’s remarks came while hearing public interest litigations or PILs highlighting the alarming number of deaths among infants, pregnant women, and lactating mothers in the Melghat tribal belt of Amravati district. According to data placed before the court, at least 115 deaths have been reported in the region, allegedly linked to malnutrition and related health complications. A division bench comprising Justices Ravindra V. Ghuge and Abhay Mantri expressed dissatisfaction with the state’s response, stating that merely presenting statistics or denying direct responsibility was insufficient. The judges stressed that the government must demonstrate seriousness, accountability, and urgency in tackling the deep-rooted causes of malnutrition rather than offering routine explanations. During the hearing, the state government acknowledged the reported deaths but argued that not all fatalities were caused solely by malnutrition. The government pointed to social factors such as early marriages, teenage pregnancies, poor maternal health, lack of awareness, and limited access to healthcare facilities as contributing causes. However, the court maintained that these issues only underline the failure of governance and welfare delivery mechanisms in vulnerable regions. Melghat, a predominantly tribal area, has long been synonymous with malnutrition-related deaths, particularly among children. Despite the presence of schemes such as the Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS), midday meal programmes, and nutrition missions, the region continues to struggle with food insecurity, poverty, inadequate medical infrastructure, and difficult terrain, which limit effective implementation. The High Court observed that the persistence of such deaths reflects systemic neglect and asked the government to move beyond paperwork. It directed authorities to identify the exact causes of deaths, strengthen on-ground monitoring, improve healthcare access, and ensure timely nutritional support to at-risk populations. Also Read: After Trump’s peace board invite, France says it's committed to UN charter Calling for a zero-tolerance approach to malnutrition-related fatalities, the bench instructed the Maharashtra government to submit a detailed action plan outlining concrete measures to prevent further deaths. The court has scheduled the next hearing for February 27, by which time it expects a clear roadmap demonstrating meaningful intervention rather than assurances. The case has once again drawn attention to the long-standing crisis of malnutrition in India’s tribal belts, raising uncomfortable questions about policy implementation, social inequality, and the state’s responsibility toward its most marginalised citizens

According to data placed before the court, at least 115 deaths have been reported in the Melghat tribal belt of Amravati district, allegedly linked to malnutrition and related health complications.

Malnutrition still killing in Maharashtra’s tribal belt

The Bombay High Court has directed businessman Vijay Mallya to return to India, warning that his plea may not be heard otherwise.


Bombay HC to Mallya: Return to India or Your Plea Won't Be Heard

The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has overturned the life sentence of Nishant Agarwal, a former senior scientist at BrahMos Aerospace, clearing him of major espionage accusations. This ruling opens the door for his release after having served over six years in custody. Agarwal was previously sentenced to life imprisonment in 2024 after being accused of leaking classified missile-related data to Pakistani intelligence agencies.&nbsp;&nbsp;However, in a judgment by Justices Anil Kilor and Pravin Patil, the court dismissed his conviction under the Information Technology Act (Section 66(f) – cyber terrorism) and the Official Secrets Act (OSA), concluding that while Agarwal had violated certain protocols, the prosecution could not prove that sensitive information had been transmitted to Pakistan or its operatives.&nbsp;Despite being acquitted of the more serious espionage charges, the court maintained his conviction under Section 5(1)(d) of the Official Secrets Act for unlawful possession of confidential documents on his personal device. He received a three-year sentence for this offense. Given that Agarwal has already been in custody since October 2018, the court ruled that his sentence was considered served.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/india-and-uae-hail-natural-partnership-at-eid-al-etihad-celebrations-in-delhi-dubai-narendra-modi-mohammed-bin-zayed-al-nahyan-1764609882197">India and UAE hail ‘natural partnership’ at Eid Al Etihad celebrations in Delhi</a>&nbsp;The prosecution had argued that Agarwal fell victim to a honey-trap operation by Pakistani agents who used fake female profiles on Facebook to manipulate him, and that malware on his laptop transferred sensitive data to foreign servers. However, the court found no solid technical evidence linking the data transfer to Pakistani operatives.&nbsp;&nbsp;Government Pleader Adv. Sanjay Doifode emphasised that the claims regarding data transmission could not be substantiated. The court's ruling also cleared Agarwal of charges under Section 66(f) of the IT Act, which had been levied based on the assumption that his data might have been extracted or transferred to third parties via malicious software. However, the prosecution failed to prove that any such transfer occurred.&nbsp;The former BrahMos engineer was initially arrested in 2018, marking a significant espionage case involving the prestigious missile project. Agarwal, who had worked as a senior system engineer on the BrahMos supersonic missile system, was accused of sharing classified information with operatives of Pakistan's ISI.&nbsp;&nbsp;His arrest shocked his colleagues, as he was a respected engineer and recipient of the DRDO Young Scientist Award. Investigators found his online communications with suspected Pakistani operatives, supposedly using fake Facebook profiles traced to Islamabad. Though his sentence for espionage has been annulled, Agarwal's conviction for possessing classified documents without authorization stands, but the court has deemed his six-year imprisonment sufficient for this lesser charge.

Bombay High Court clears ex-BrahMos scientist Nishant Agarwal of espionage charges, reduces sentence

The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court has overturned the life sentence of Nishant Agarwal, a former senior scientist at BrahMos Aerospace, clearing him of major espionage accusations. This ruling opens the door for his release after having served over six years in custody. Agarwal was previously sentenced to life imprisonment in 2024 after being accused of leaking classified missile-related data to Pakistani intelligence agencies. However, in a judgment by Justices Anil Kilor and Pravin Patil, the court dismissed his conviction under the Information Technology Act (Section 66(f) – cyber terrorism) and the Official Secrets Act (OSA), concluding that while Agarwal had violated certain protocols, the prosecution could not prove that sensitive information had been transmitted to Pakistan or its operatives. Despite being acquitted of the more serious espionage charges, the court maintained his conviction under Section 5(1)(d) of the Official Secrets Act for unlawful possession of confidential documents on his personal device. He received a three-year sentence for this offense. Given that Agarwal has already been in custody since October 2018, the court ruled that his sentence was considered served. Also Read: India and UAE hail ‘natural partnership’ at Eid Al Etihad celebrations in Delhi The prosecution had argued that Agarwal fell victim to a honey-trap operation by Pakistani agents who used fake female profiles on Facebook to manipulate him, and that malware on his laptop transferred sensitive data to foreign servers. However, the court found no solid technical evidence linking the data transfer to Pakistani operatives. Government Pleader Adv. Sanjay Doifode emphasised that the claims regarding data transmission could not be substantiated. The court's ruling also cleared Agarwal of charges under Section 66(f) of the IT Act, which had been levied based on the assumption that his data might have been extracted or transferred to third parties via malicious software. However, the prosecution failed to prove that any such transfer occurred. The former BrahMos engineer was initially arrested in 2018, marking a significant espionage case involving the prestigious missile project. Agarwal, who had worked as a senior system engineer on the BrahMos supersonic missile system, was accused of sharing classified information with operatives of Pakistan's ISI. His arrest shocked his colleagues, as he was a respected engineer and recipient of the DRDO Young Scientist Award. Investigators found his online communications with suspected Pakistani operatives, supposedly using fake Facebook profiles traced to Islamabad. Though his sentence for espionage has been annulled, Agarwal's conviction for possessing classified documents without authorization stands, but the court has deemed his six-year imprisonment sufficient for this lesser charge.

Bombay HC overturns life sentence of ex-BrahMos scientist Nishant Agarwal on espionage charges, clears him of data leak claims, upholds three-year term for document possession

The Bombay High Court on Wednesday directed actor Shilpa Shetty and her husband Raj Kundra to deposit ₹60 crore before their plea seeking permission to travel abroad could be considered. The couple had approached the court requesting the suspension of a Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against them by the Mumbai Police’s Economic Offences Wing (EOW) in connection with an alleged ₹60 crore fraud case.&nbsp;<h2>The court’s stern direction</h2>The division bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad observed that, given the gravity of the allegations, the petitioners must first deposit the disputed sum before seeking any relaxation in travel restrictions. The court also refused to stay the LOC, emphasizing that until the financial dispute is addressed, international travel cannot be permitted.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/bollywood/soha-ali-khan-on-interfaith-marriages-backlash-on-saif-and-kareena-wedding-there-s-going-to-be-lots-of-haters-1759920669499">Soha Ali Khan on interfaith marriages, says 'There’s going to be lots of haters'</a>&nbsp;Shetty and Kundra had sought temporary suspension of the LOC to travel abroad between October 2025 and January 2026, citing professional and business commitments, including a YouTube event in Colombo later this month. However, the court noted that the couple failed to provide formal invitations or supporting documents for the trip.&nbsp;The matter has now been adjourned to October 14 for further hearing.&nbsp;<h2>What is the case about?</h2>The case stems from a complaint filed by Deepak Kothari, director of Lotus Capital Financial Services, who accused the couple of cheating him out of nearly ₹60 crore. According to the complaint, between 2015 and 2023, Shetty and Kundra allegedly convinced Kothari to invest in their company, Best Deal TV Pvt Ltd, which was promoted as India’s first celebrity-based teleshopping platform.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/bollywood/ek-deewane-ki-deewaniyat-trailer-harshvardhan-rane-sonam-bajwa-bring-a-story-of-love-pain-obsession-1759914674142">Ek Deewane Ki Deewaniyat trailer: Harshvardhan, Sonam's tale of love &amp; obsession</a>&nbsp;Kothari claimed that the duo initially sought a ₹75 crore loan at a 12% interest rate but later persuaded him to treat the amount as an investment, promising monthly returns. He alleged that ₹31.95 crore was transferred in April 2015 and another ₹28.53 crore in September 2015, both to Best Deal TV’s accounts. However, the funds were allegedly misused for personal expenses rather than business operations.&nbsp;In 2016, Shetty stepped down as the company’s director, and insolvency proceedings later began against the firm for defaulting on payments to other investors.&nbsp;<h2>EOW investigation and questioning</h2>The Economic Offences Wing registered an FIR under Sections 403 (dishonest misappropriation of property), 406 (criminal breach of trust), and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code. Both Shetty and Kundra have been questioned multiple times.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/bollywood/chandni-bar-returns-in-legal-trouble-after-madhur-bhandarkar-s-complaint-over-title-ownership-1759910794780">Madhur Bhandarkar files complaint over Chandni Bar title; makers react</a>&nbsp;On October 4, a team from the EOW questioned Shilpa Shetty at her Mumbai residence for over four hours. During the inquiry, she reportedly stated that she was not involved in the company’s day-to-day affairs and was paid only as a celebrity endorser. She also submitted documents to support her claims, which are now under verification.&nbsp;<h2>Defence statement</h2>The couple’s lawyer, Prashant Patil, has denied all allegations, stating that the claims are “baseless” and that the duo is fully cooperating with the authorities. He added that Shetty’s professional engagements abroad were legitimate and that denying her travel would amount to a violation of her fundamental right to work.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/bollywood/ajay-devgn-s-drishyam-3-teaser-postponed-here-s-why-the-october-2-release-didn-t-happen-1759908408858">Ajay Devgn’s Drishyam 3 teaser postponed: Why the Oct 2 release didn’t happen</a><h2>What’s next?</h2>The Bombay High Court’s direction effectively means that the couple’s plea for travel will only be considered after they deposit the full ₹60 crore, the amount equivalent to the alleged fraud. Until then, the LOC will remain active, preventing them from travelling abroad.&nbsp;With the case continuing to unfold, all eyes are now on the October 14 hearing, which may determine whether Shilpa Shetty and Raj Kundra will be allowed to leave India amid ongoing investigations.&nbsp;

Amid a ₹60 crore fraud case, the Bombay High Court has denied Shilpa Shetty and Raj Kundra permission to travel abroad.  Read on to know more. 


The Bombay High Court on Wednesday directed actor Shilpa Shetty and her husband Raj Kundra to deposit ₹60 crore before their plea seeking permission to travel abroad could be considered. The couple had approached the court requesting the suspension of a Look Out Circular (LOC) issued against them by the Mumbai Police’s Economic Offences Wing (EOW) in connection with an alleged ₹60 crore fraud case. The court’s stern direction The division bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam Ankhad observed that, given the gravity of the allegations, the petitioners must first deposit the disputed sum before seeking any relaxation in travel restrictions. The court also refused to stay the LOC, emphasizing that until the financial dispute is addressed, international travel cannot be permitted. Also Read: Soha Ali Khan on interfaith marriages, says 'There’s going to be lots of haters' Shetty and Kundra had sought temporary suspension of the LOC to travel abroad between October 2025 and January 2026, citing professional and business commitments, including a YouTube event in Colombo later this month. However, the court noted that the couple failed to provide formal invitations or supporting documents for the trip. The matter has now been adjourned to October 14 for further hearing. What is the case about? The case stems from a complaint filed by Deepak Kothari, director of Lotus Capital Financial Services, who accused the couple of cheating him out of nearly ₹60 crore. According to the complaint, between 2015 and 2023, Shetty and Kundra allegedly convinced Kothari to invest in their company, Best Deal TV Pvt Ltd, which was promoted as India’s first celebrity-based teleshopping platform. Also Read: Ek Deewane Ki Deewaniyat trailer: Harshvardhan, Sonam's tale of love & obsession Kothari claimed that the duo initially sought a ₹75 crore loan at a 12% interest rate but later persuaded him to treat the amount as an investment, promising monthly returns. He alleged that ₹31.95 crore was transferred in April 2015 and another ₹28.53 crore in September 2015, both to Best Deal TV’s accounts. However, the funds were allegedly misused for personal expenses rather than business operations. In 2016, Shetty stepped down as the company’s director, and insolvency proceedings later began against the firm for defaulting on payments to other investors. EOW investigation and questioning The Economic Offences Wing registered an FIR under Sections 403 (dishonest misappropriation of property), 406 (criminal breach of trust), and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code. Both Shetty and Kundra have been questioned multiple times. Also Read: Madhur Bhandarkar files complaint over Chandni Bar title; makers react On October 4, a team from the EOW questioned Shilpa Shetty at her Mumbai residence for over four hours. During the inquiry, she reportedly stated that she was not involved in the company’s day-to-day affairs and was paid only as a celebrity endorser. She also submitted documents to support her claims, which are now under verification. Defence statement The couple’s lawyer, Prashant Patil, has denied all allegations, stating that the claims are “baseless” and that the duo is fully cooperating with the authorities. He added that Shetty’s professional engagements abroad were legitimate and that denying her travel would amount to a violation of her fundamental right to work. Also Read: Ajay Devgn’s Drishyam 3 teaser postponed: Why the Oct 2 release didn’t happen What’s next? The Bombay High Court’s direction effectively means that the couple’s plea for travel will only be considered after they deposit the full ₹60 crore, the amount equivalent to the alleged fraud. Until then, the LOC will remain active, preventing them from travelling abroad. With the case continuing to unfold, all eyes are now on the October 14 hearing, which may determine whether Shilpa Shetty and Raj Kundra will be allowed to leave India amid ongoing investigations.

Amid a ₹60 crore fraud case, the Bombay High Court has denied Shilpa Shetty and Raj Kundra permission to travel abroad. &nbsp;Read on to know more.&nbsp;

Bombay HC bars Shilpa Shetty, Raj Kundra from foreign travel without ₹60 crore deposit

The Bombay High Court on Friday dismissed a petition by the Communist Party&nbsp;of India (Marxist) seeking permission to protest over the alleged "genocide" in Gaza by Israel, asking the petitioners to show patriotism for India first. A division bench, comprising Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad, observed that the political party must focus on taking up issues concerning the citizens of India.&nbsp;Justice Ghuge, in a strongly worded observation, said speaking for Gaza and Palestine isn't patriotism, and India is facing several issues of its own that need highlighting. He asked the party why it doesn't&nbsp;do something for India, advising it to be "patriots".&nbsp;"Our country has several issues to deal with...We don't want anything like this. I am sorry to say, you are all short-sighted...You are looking at Gaza and Palestine... Why don't you do something for our own country... Be patriots... Speaking for Gaza and Palestine is not patriotism... Speak up for the causes in our own country... Practice what you preach..." Justice Ghuge was quoted as saying by Live Law.&nbsp;Responding to the observation, CPI(M)'s lawyer, senior advocate Mihir Desai, told the judges that his clients had been taking up charitable causes, including organising health and education camps.&nbsp;The bench later expressed curiosity as to why the party wants to protest against something that is happening in the Middle East, thousands of miles away.&nbsp;"We are curious.. You have no issue with respect to our own country...something productive for our own country... They are fighting 1000s of miles away, and you are showing concern for Palestine, Gaza, etc. You can take up social issues and local issues like flooding, drainage, getting blocked... Parking illegally... Why aren't you protesting such issues?" Justice Ghuge said.&nbsp;The court further asked the petitioners why they were interested in raising issues that don't concern the common man.&nbsp;"Do we have so much time to spend hearing such a matter when we have hundreds of cases of our citizens listed? Are these not our constitutional issues?" the judge said.&nbsp;Thousands of Gazans have died in Israel's ground assault and aerial bombardment, which began in October 2023 in response to Hamas' attack on Israeli cities.

The Bombay High Court on Friday dismissed a petition by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) seeking permission to protest over the alleged "genocide" in Gaza by Israel, asking the petitioners to show patriotism for India first. 

The Bombay High Court on Friday dismissed a petition by the Communist Party of India (Marxist) seeking permission to protest over the alleged "genocide" in Gaza by Israel, asking the petitioners to show patriotism for India first. A division bench, comprising Justices Ravindra Ghuge and Gautam Ankhad, observed that the political party must focus on taking up issues concerning the citizens of India. Justice Ghuge, in a strongly worded observation, said speaking for Gaza and Palestine isn't patriotism, and India is facing several issues of its own that need highlighting. He asked the party why it doesn't do something for India, advising it to be "patriots". "Our country has several issues to deal with...We don't want anything like this. I am sorry to say, you are all short-sighted...You are looking at Gaza and Palestine... Why don't you do something for our own country... Be patriots... Speaking for Gaza and Palestine is not patriotism... Speak up for the causes in our own country... Practice what you preach..." Justice Ghuge was quoted as saying by Live Law. Responding to the observation, CPI(M)'s lawyer, senior advocate Mihir Desai, told the judges that his clients had been taking up charitable causes, including organising health and education camps. The bench later expressed curiosity as to why the party wants to protest against something that is happening in the Middle East, thousands of miles away. "We are curious.. You have no issue with respect to our own country...something productive for our own country... They are fighting 1000s of miles away, and you are showing concern for Palestine, Gaza, etc. You can take up social issues and local issues like flooding, drainage, getting blocked... Parking illegally... Why aren't you protesting such issues?" Justice Ghuge said. The court further asked the petitioners why they were interested in raising issues that don't concern the common man. "Do we have so much time to spend hearing such a matter when we have hundreds of cases of our citizens listed? Are these not our constitutional issues?" the judge said. Thousands of Gazans have died in Israel's ground assault and aerial bombardment, which began in October 2023 in response to Hamas' attack on Israeli cities.

Israel-Palestine war: The Bombay High Court, dismissing CPI(M)'s petition, observed that speaking for Gaza and Palestine isn't patriotism.

'Short-sighted, be patriots': Bombay High Court admonishes CPI(M) over Gaza petition

In one of the worst terror attacks in Mumbai's history, the Bombay High Court on Monday (July 21) acquitted all 12 men convicted in the deadly coordinated blasts on Mumbai's suburban trains, which claimed the lives of over 180 people. 19 years after the incident shook the world, the court ruled that the prosecution "utterly failed" to prove the men's involvement, adding that the evidence was insufficient for conviction.&nbsp;A series of coordinated attacks was executed at Mumbai's suburban railway network, killing 187 people and injuring over 800.&nbsp;Earlier in 2015, a special Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) court sentenced five of them to death, while announcing life imprisonment to the remaining seven people.<h2>What happened on July 11, 2006?</h2>Mumbai saw one of the deadliest terror attacks in July 2006, which took the lives of over 180 people, while affecting the lives of thousands of others. On the evening of July 11, seven bombs exploded in a series of coordinated blasts inside first-class compartments of suburban trains on the Western line between 6:23 PM and 6:28 PM.&nbsp;The first blasts happened at Mahim, Bandra, and Mira Road, while the final explosion happened at Borivali at 6:28 pm. According to the investigators, the blasts were coordinated using timer devices.&nbsp;The blasts tore through steel compartments, throwing bodies onto the tracks and platforms. Reportedly, the attacks targeted trains packed with office-goers returning home to the far suburbs.&nbsp;Moreover, as per reports, the bombs detonated in moving trains between Matunga and Mira Road stations. The explosions not just killed the commuters inside the train, but at Mahim and Borivali, people who were standing on platforms waiting for trains were also killed.<h2>2015 Bombay High Court's ruling</h2>On September 30, 2015, 13 individuals were arrested and tried under MCOCA. The Bombay special court sentenced five men to death, who were identified as Kamal Ahmed Mohammed Vakil Ansari, Mohammed Faisal Ataur Rahman Shaikh, Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddique, Naveed Hussain Khan Rasheed Hussain Khan, and Asif Khan Bashir Khan alias Juned.&nbsp;Meanwhile, the special court announced life imprisonment for seven others. Only one accused, Abdul Wahin Din Mohammad Shaikh, was acquitted during the 2015 trial.&nbsp;Moreover, one of the 13 convicts died while waiting for an appeal.<h2>What did Bombay High Court say today?</h2>A special division bench comprising Justices Anil Kilor and Shyam Chandak, on Monday, said that they have found serious lapses in the investigation and prosecution.&nbsp;"The prosecution has utterly failed to prove the case against the accused. It is hard to believe that the accused committed the crime. Hence, their conviction is quashed and set aside,” the bench said.&nbsp;The high court further stated that the prosecution was unable to even establish the nature of the bombs used in the Mumbai train attacks, adding that the alleged recoveries had no evidentiary value, according to Indian news agency PTI.&nbsp;

Mumbai saw one of the deadliest terror attacks in July 2006, which killed over 180 people, while affecting the lives of thousands. On the evening of July 11, seven bombs exploded in a series of coordinated blasts inside first-class compartments of suburban trains on the Western line. 

In one of the worst terror attacks in Mumbai's history, the Bombay High Court on Monday (July 21) acquitted all 12 men convicted in the deadly coordinated blasts on Mumbai's suburban trains, which claimed the lives of over 180 people. 19 years after the incident shook the world, the court ruled that the prosecution "utterly failed" to prove the men's involvement, adding that the evidence was insufficient for conviction. A series of coordinated attacks was executed at Mumbai's suburban railway network, killing 187 people and injuring over 800. Earlier in 2015, a special Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) court sentenced five of them to death, while announcing life imprisonment to the remaining seven people. What happened on July 11, 2006? Mumbai saw one of the deadliest terror attacks in July 2006, which took the lives of over 180 people, while affecting the lives of thousands of others. On the evening of July 11, seven bombs exploded in a series of coordinated blasts inside first-class compartments of suburban trains on the Western line between 6:23 PM and 6:28 PM. The first blasts happened at Mahim, Bandra, and Mira Road, while the final explosion happened at Borivali at 6:28 pm. According to the investigators, the blasts were coordinated using timer devices. The blasts tore through steel compartments, throwing bodies onto the tracks and platforms. Reportedly, the attacks targeted trains packed with office-goers returning home to the far suburbs. Moreover, as per reports, the bombs detonated in moving trains between Matunga and Mira Road stations. The explosions not just killed the commuters inside the train, but at Mahim and Borivali, people who were standing on platforms waiting for trains were also killed. 2015 Bombay High Court's ruling On September 30, 2015, 13 individuals were arrested and tried under MCOCA. The Bombay special court sentenced five men to death, who were identified as Kamal Ahmed Mohammed Vakil Ansari, Mohammed Faisal Ataur Rahman Shaikh, Ehtesham Qutubuddin Siddique, Naveed Hussain Khan Rasheed Hussain Khan, and Asif Khan Bashir Khan alias Juned. Meanwhile, the special court announced life imprisonment for seven others. Only one accused, Abdul Wahin Din Mohammad Shaikh, was acquitted during the 2015 trial. Moreover, one of the 13 convicts died while waiting for an appeal. What did Bombay High Court say today? A special division bench comprising Justices Anil Kilor and Shyam Chandak, on Monday, said that they have found serious lapses in the investigation and prosecution. "The prosecution has utterly failed to prove the case against the accused. It is hard to believe that the accused committed the crime. Hence, their conviction is quashed and set aside,” the bench said. The high court further stated that the prosecution was unable to even establish the nature of the bombs used in the Mumbai train attacks, adding that the alleged recoveries had no evidentiary value, according to Indian news agency PTI.

Mumbai saw one of the deadliest terror attacks in July 2006, which killed over 180 people, while affecting the lives of thousands. On the evening of July 11, seven bombs exploded in a series of coordinated blasts inside first-class compartments of suburban trains on the Western line.&nbsp;

2006 Mumbai train blasts: 7 blasts, 187 killed, but 0 accused - Know how series of explosions shook the world nine years ago

In a shocking statement, the Bombay High Court has granted bail to a man arrested for raping a 15-year-old girl citing that the girl "voluntarily" joined the man despite having "sufficient knowledge and capacity to know full import of what she was doing." The court also said that the man deserved a bail because he was incarcerated for three years and 11 months and there was "no possibility of the trial commencing/concluding in the near foreseeable future."
Read More |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/man-rapes-infant-indian-court-reduces-life-sentence-to-10-years-says-original-punishment-was-harsh-and-excessive-8887575">Man rapes infant, Indian court reduces life sentence to 10 years, says original punishment was 'harsh and excessive'</a>
The accused was arrested in 2021 and was booked under offences of kidnapping and raping minor girl under Indian Penal Code (IPC) and provisions of the Protection of Children against Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. A single-judge bench of Justice Milind N Jadhav on April 9 passed an order on bail application. The bail order was passed on April 9 and the man got out of the jail today.
Read More |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-stays-allahabad-hcs-ruling-that-grabbing-breasts-and-pulling-pyjama-strings-not-rape-8892087" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Supreme Court stays Allahabad HC's ruling that 'grabbing breasts and pulling pyjama strings' not rape</a>
<h2>What was the case?</h2>
As per a report in The Indian Express, the victim&rsquo;s father filed an FIR in August 2020, and has stated that her daughter had left the house and is allegedly with the accused in another state. Later, in May, 2021, the victim, a minor (then 15 years and 3 months old) informed her father about her pregnancy and the accused's refusal to marry her. As per the FIR, she was then brought back to Maharashtra.
Read More |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/who-is-justice-ram-manohar-narayan-mishra-allahabad-hc-judge-who-ruled-grabbing-breasts-not-rape-attempt-8893416" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Who is Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, Allahabad HC judge who ruled &lsquo;grabbing breasts not rape attempt&rsquo;?</a>
In the statement by the victim, she said that she knew the accused since 2019 and would regularly meet, despite the disapproval of her parents.&nbsp;She claimed that he had forceful sexual relations with her in March, 2020. Later, during their stay outside Maharashtra in July, 2020, they had physical relations, which led to her pregnancy.
Advocate Mateen Qureshi, appearing for the accused argued that the girl on her own volition had stayed with the applicant for 10 months.&nbsp;Qureshi also argued that despite the father being aware of her location, he did not take any measures to secure her custody.
Read More | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/allahabad-high-court-says-rape-victim-responsible-grants-bail-to-accused-she-invited-trouble-8949367">Allahabad HC holds woman 'responsible' in rape case, grants bail to accused: 'She invited trouble'</a>
(With inputs from agencies)

India News | In a shocking statement, the Bombay High Court has granted bail to a man in a rape case of minor citing that the girl "voluntarily" joined the man

In a shocking statement, the Bombay High Court has granted bail to a man arrested for raping a 15-year-old girl citing that the girl "voluntarily" joined the man despite having "sufficient knowledge and capacity to know full import of what she was doing." The court also said that the man deserved a bail because he was incarcerated for three years and 11 months and there was "no possibility of the trial commencing/concluding in the near foreseeable future." Read More | Man rapes infant, Indian court reduces life sentence to 10 years, says original punishment was 'harsh and excessive' The accused was arrested in 2021 and was booked under offences of kidnapping and raping minor girl under Indian Penal Code (IPC) and provisions of the Protection of Children against Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. A single-judge bench of Justice Milind N Jadhav on April 9 passed an order on bail application. The bail order was passed on April 9 and the man got out of the jail today. Read More | Supreme Court stays Allahabad HC's ruling that 'grabbing breasts and pulling pyjama strings' not rape What was the case? As per a report in The Indian Express, the victim’s father filed an FIR in August 2020, and has stated that her daughter had left the house and is allegedly with the accused in another state. Later, in May, 2021, the victim, a minor (then 15 years and 3 months old) informed her father about her pregnancy and the accused's refusal to marry her. As per the FIR, she was then brought back to Maharashtra. Read More | Who is Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, Allahabad HC judge who ruled ‘grabbing breasts not rape attempt’? In the statement by the victim, she said that she knew the accused since 2019 and would regularly meet, despite the disapproval of her parents. She claimed that he had forceful sexual relations with her in March, 2020. Later, during their stay outside Maharashtra in July, 2020, they had physical relations, which led to her pregnancy. Advocate Mateen Qureshi, appearing for the accused argued that the girl on her own volition had stayed with the applicant for 10 months. Qureshi also argued that despite the father being aware of her location, he did not take any measures to secure her custody. Read More | Allahabad HC holds woman 'responsible' in rape case, grants bail to accused: 'She invited trouble' (With inputs from agencies)

Bombay HC grants bail to man in minor's rape case, says she 'voluntarily' joined him

The Bombay High Court has granted temporary relief to former SEBI chief Madhabi Puri Buch and five other officials. The Bombay High Court has stayed a special court’s order that directed it to file a First Information Report (FIR) concerning the alleged stock market fraud. Watch this report for more details!

Ex-SEBI Chief Madhabi Puri Buch gets 4-week relief from Bombay High Court

Bombay High Court’s bench in the Indian state of Maharashtra’s Aurangabad has overturned a 20-year-old court order that convicted a man and his family for cruelty towards his late wife. The court said that allegations of not allowing their daughter-in-law to watch TV, forcing her to sleep on the carpet, not letting her visit the temple alone, and verbally abusing her were not “severe” actions under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-up-panel-suggests-no-male-tailor-should-take-womens-measurements-for-safety-774616">India: UP panel suggests 'no male tailor should take women’s measurements' for safety</a>

Section 498A of the IPC states, “Whoever being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend for three years and shall also be liable to fine.”

The high court observed that the nature of these allegations involving domestic problems do not amount to physical and mental torture. The man, along with his brother and parents were acquitted by the High Court for these offences and IPC Section 306 (abetment of suicide).&nbsp;

The couple in question got married in December 2002, and the woman committed suicide in May 2003, due to alleged ill-treatment by her in-laws.

In an October 17 order, the single judge bench of Justice Abhay S Waghwase dismissed the allegations of cruelty towards her. The woman’s family also complained that her in-laws demanded dowry and would send her to fetch water at midnight.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/three-coaches-of-the-secunderabad-shalimar-express-derail-in-indias-howrah-774751">Three coaches of the Secunderabad-Shalimar Express derail in India's Howrah</a>

However, the court noted that the village of Varangaon, where they lived, usually received the water supply around midnight and families would go to fetch water around that time.

“There is a gap of almost two months since deceased, complainant and witnesses met each other. They (mother, uncle and aunt of deceased) have admitted that, there was no communication from deceased either written or oral, she has not conveyed that there was any instances of cruelty in proximity to suicide. There is no evidence to show that at that relevant point or any proximity to the suicide, there was any demand, cruelty or mal-treatment so as to connect them with the suicidal death. What triggered the suicide has remained a mystery,” the high court wrote&nbsp;in its order, as per LiveLaw.

(With inputs from agencies)

Bombay High Court’s bench in the Indian state of Maharashtra’s Aurangabad has overturned a 20-year-old court order that convicted a man and his family for cruelty towards his late wife.

Bombay High Court’s bench in the Indian state of Maharashtra’s Aurangabad has overturned a 20-year-old court order that convicted a man and his family for cruelty towards his late wife. The court said that allegations of not allowing their daughter-in-law to watch TV, forcing her to sleep on the carpet, not letting her visit the temple alone, and verbally abusing her were not “severe” actions under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Also read | India: UP panel suggests 'no male tailor should take women’s measurements' for safety Section 498A of the IPC states, “Whoever being the husband or the relative of the husband of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend for three years and shall also be liable to fine.” The high court observed that the nature of these allegations involving domestic problems do not amount to physical and mental torture. The man, along with his brother and parents were acquitted by the High Court for these offences and IPC Section 306 (abetment of suicide). The couple in question got married in December 2002, and the woman committed suicide in May 2003, due to alleged ill-treatment by her in-laws. In an October 17 order, the single judge bench of Justice Abhay S Waghwase dismissed the allegations of cruelty towards her. The woman’s family also complained that her in-laws demanded dowry and would send her to fetch water at midnight. Also read | Three coaches of the Secunderabad-Shalimar Express derail in India's Howrah However, the court noted that the village of Varangaon, where they lived, usually received the water supply around midnight and families would go to fetch water around that time. “There is a gap of almost two months since deceased, complainant and witnesses met each other. They (mother, uncle and aunt of deceased) have admitted that, there was no communication from deceased either written or oral, she has not conveyed that there was any instances of cruelty in proximity to suicide. There is no evidence to show that at that relevant point or any proximity to the suicide, there was any demand, cruelty or mal-treatment so as to connect them with the suicidal death. What triggered the suicide has remained a mystery,” the high court wrote in its order, as per LiveLaw. (With inputs from agencies)

Forcing daughter-in-law to sleep on carpet, verbal abuse not cruelty: Bombay High Court

There is good news for those waiting for Kangana Ranaut's Emergency to release&nbsp;in theatres. The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) is ready to release Emergency - Kangana's directorial feature but with some cuts.&nbsp; 
 
The CBFC has informed the Bombay High Court that its revising committee has suggested some cuts for the film before it releases in theatres.&nbsp; 
 
The CBFC on Thursday responded to a plea filed by co-producer Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited, which alleged that the CBFC was “illegally” and “arbitrarily” withholding certification for the film.&nbsp; 
 
Emergency has been directed and co-produced by BJP MP Kangana Ranaut who plays the role of former Indian prime minister Indira Gandhi. 
 
The movie was scheduled to release on September 6, but ran into trouble after complaints of historical inaccuracies and misrepresenting the Sikh community.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/priyanka-chopra-samantha-bond-over-citadel-honey-bunny-screening-in-london-see-pics-761789">Priyanka Chopra, Samantha bond over Citadel Honey Bunny screening in London; see pics</a>

After the lawyer representing Zee Entertainment sought time to take instructions to decide whether the cuts should be made, a bench of Justices B P Colabawalla and Firdosh P Pooniwalla posted further hearings&nbsp;for Monday, September 30. 
 
Earlier, the high court had directed CBFC to decide on the film by September 25 on the release of the film, stating that the delay in certification restricts freedom of expression. The court asked CBFC to 'not sit on the fence' as the delay led to the financial burden on the producers.&nbsp; 
 
The petitioner, during an earlier hearing, had contended a “political angle” that the Haryana elections were the reason for the delay in the release of the certification, citing “larger interests” of the party. 
 
“They (ruling party BJP) are willing to displease the sitting MP (Ranaut, who is a co-producer and represents the Mandi constituency in Lok Sabha) to appease a particular section of the society… Here is a film that is anti-Sikh as per some groups. Then who will be responsible for releasing an anti-Sikh movie? It will be the CBFC, which is the executive. So, some members of the community will say we will not vote for the ruling party in the coming Haryana elections,” the petitioner’s lawyer had submitted.

“You mean to say the political party is ruling against its own member of Parliament?” the bench had asked, to which the petitioner responded in the affirmative and sought an urgent decision. 
 
CBFC ready to release film with cuts 
 
On Thursday, as the hearing on the plea began, Justice Colabawalla told advocate Abhinav Chandrachud representing CBFC, “Give us some good news.” Chandrachud responded that the Board has decided and suggested some cuts to the film and if they are made, the film can be released. 
 
Advocate Sharan Jagtiani, on behalf of the petitioner, sought time to take instructions to decide whether the cuts could be made to the film. 
&nbsp;

There is good news for those waiting for Kangana Ranaut's Emergency to release in theatres. The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) is ready to release Emergency - Kangana's directorial feature but with some cuts.

There is good news for those waiting for Kangana Ranaut's Emergency to release in theatres. The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) is ready to release Emergency - Kangana's directorial feature but with some cuts. The CBFC has informed the Bombay High Court that its revising committee has suggested some cuts for the film before it releases in theatres. The CBFC on Thursday responded to a plea filed by co-producer Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited, which alleged that the CBFC was “illegally” and “arbitrarily” withholding certification for the film. Emergency has been directed and co-produced by BJP MP Kangana Ranaut who plays the role of former Indian prime minister Indira Gandhi. The movie was scheduled to release on September 6, but ran into trouble after complaints of historical inaccuracies and misrepresenting the Sikh community. Also read: Priyanka Chopra, Samantha bond over Citadel Honey Bunny screening in London; see pics After the lawyer representing Zee Entertainment sought time to take instructions to decide whether the cuts should be made, a bench of Justices B P Colabawalla and Firdosh P Pooniwalla posted further hearings for Monday, September 30. Earlier, the high court had directed CBFC to decide on the film by September 25 on the release of the film, stating that the delay in certification restricts freedom of expression. The court asked CBFC to 'not sit on the fence' as the delay led to the financial burden on the producers. The petitioner, during an earlier hearing, had contended a “political angle” that the Haryana elections were the reason for the delay in the release of the certification, citing “larger interests” of the party. “They (ruling party BJP) are willing to displease the sitting MP (Ranaut, who is a co-producer and represents the Mandi constituency in Lok Sabha) to appease a particular section of the society… Here is a film that is anti-Sikh as per some groups. Then who will be responsible for releasing an anti-Sikh movie? It will be the CBFC, which is the executive. So, some members of the community will say we will not vote for the ruling party in the coming Haryana elections,” the petitioner’s lawyer had submitted. “You mean to say the political party is ruling against its own member of Parliament?” the bench had asked, to which the petitioner responded in the affirmative and sought an urgent decision. CBFC ready to release film with cuts On Thursday, as the hearing on the plea began, Justice Colabawalla told advocate Abhinav Chandrachud representing CBFC, “Give us some good news.” Chandrachud responded that the Board has decided and suggested some cuts to the film and if they are made, the film can be released. Advocate Sharan Jagtiani, on behalf of the petitioner, sought time to take instructions to decide whether the cuts could be made to the film.

Kangana Ranaut's Emergency can release but with certain cuts, says CBFC to Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court questioned the Mumbai Police regarding the death of the Badlapur sexual assault accused, Askhay Shinde, and said that the incident could not be "termed an encounter", stressing that a probe should be conducted in a fair and impartial manner.&nbsp;

The high court also said that the shootout of the accused could have been avoided.&nbsp;

According to the police statement, Shinde succumbed to injuries after he snatched the revolver of a police officer in the police van&nbsp;while he was being taken to Badlapur from Taloja jail, and opened fire on the cops, leading to retaliatory firing in which he got shot.&nbsp;

“Why was the accused shot in the head directly and not in the legs or arms first,” the Bombay High Court questioned.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/extra-judicial-killing-cop-who-shot-akshay-shinde-linked-to-encounter-specialist-pradeep-sharma-761542">Also read:&nbsp;Extra-judicial killing? Cop who shot Badlapur accused linked to ‘encounter specialist’ Pradeep Sharma</a>

Replying to the bench, the Chief Public Prosecutor said, "The officer did not think this, and he just reacted. It was an on-the-spot reaction."

Justice Prithviraj Chavan said, "The moment he pulled the first trigger, the others could have easily overpowered him. He wasn't a huge built up or strong man. This is very difficult to accept. This cannot be termed as an encounter."

Akshay Shinde's father, Anna Shinde, filed a petition in the Bombay High Court on Tuesday, alleging that his son was killed in a fake encounter and demanded a Special &nbsp;Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate the case.

Watch |&nbsp;Badlapur Sexual Assault Case: Bombay High Court hears matter after Suo Moto Cognisance

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/badlapur-sexual-assault-case-bombay-high-court-hears-matter-after-suo-moto-conginsance-752187/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Stressing that it was hard to believe the police statement, the court said, "You said the accused fired three bullets towards the police. Only one hit the cop. What about the other two? Was there any ricochet?"

During the hearing, the high court told the public prosecutor that a revolver can't be unlocked quickly by a physically weak man. “It is not very easy,” it said.

(With inputs from agencies)

The Bombay High Court questioned the Mumbai Police regarding the death of the Badlapur sexual assault accused, Askhay Shinde, and said that the incident could not be "termed an encounter", stressing that a probe should be conducted in a fair and impartial manner.

The Bombay High Court questioned the Mumbai Police regarding the death of the Badlapur sexual assault accused, Askhay Shinde, and said that the incident could not be "termed an encounter", stressing that a probe should be conducted in a fair and impartial manner. The high court also said that the shootout of the accused could have been avoided. According to the police statement, Shinde succumbed to injuries after he snatched the revolver of a police officer in the police van while he was being taken to Badlapur from Taloja jail, and opened fire on the cops, leading to retaliatory firing in which he got shot. “Why was the accused shot in the head directly and not in the legs or arms first,” the Bombay High Court questioned. Also read: Extra-judicial killing? Cop who shot Badlapur accused linked to ‘encounter specialist’ Pradeep Sharma Replying to the bench, the Chief Public Prosecutor said, "The officer did not think this, and he just reacted. It was an on-the-spot reaction." Justice Prithviraj Chavan said, "The moment he pulled the first trigger, the others could have easily overpowered him. He wasn't a huge built up or strong man. This is very difficult to accept. This cannot be termed as an encounter." Akshay Shinde's father, Anna Shinde, filed a petition in the Bombay High Court on Tuesday, alleging that his son was killed in a fake encounter and demanded a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate the case. Watch | Badlapur Sexual Assault Case: Bombay High Court hears matter after Suo Moto Cognisance × Stressing that it was hard to believe the police statement, the court said, "You said the accused fired three bullets towards the police. Only one hit the cop. What about the other two? Was there any ricochet?" During the hearing, the high court told the public prosecutor that a revolver can't be unlocked quickly by a physically weak man. “It is not very easy,” it said. (With inputs from agencies)

'Cannot be termed an encounter': Bombay HC pulls up Mumbai Police over Badlapur accused’s death

The Bombay High Court on Friday (Sep 20) struck down the amended Information Technology (IT) Rules which sought to identify fake and false content on social media against the government by terming it 'unconstitutional'. &nbsp;&nbsp;

The matter was assigned to Justice AS Chandurkar as ‘tie-breaker judge’, after a division bench in January 2024 delivered a split verdict on the petitions challenging the amended IT rules.

Justice Chandurkar on Friday held that the rules violated constitutional provisions.

"I have considered the matter extensively. The impugned rules are violative of Article 14 (right to equality), 19 (freedom of speech and expression) and 19(1)(g) (freedom and right to profession) of the Constitution of India," the judge said.

The expression "fake, false and misleading" in the Rules was "vague and hence wrong" in the absence of any definition, he added.

With this ruling, the High Court allowed the petitions filed by stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra and others challenging the new rules, including the provision to set up a Fact Checking Unit (FCU) to identify fake or false content about the government.

The petitions against the IT Rules were referred to Justice Chandurkar after a division bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhale delivered a split verdict in January.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/anti-india-campaign-in-bangladesh-new-delhi-fact-checks-flooding-claim-752465">Watch |&nbsp;Anti-India Campaign in Bangladesh: New Delhi Fact Checks Flooding Claim</a>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/anti-india-campaign-in-bangladesh-new-delhi-fact-checks-flooding-claim-752465/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

While Justice Patel struck down the Rules, Justice Gokhale upheld them.

Justice Patel had said the Rules amounted to censorship, but Justice Gokhale had opined they did not have any 'chilling effect' on free speech as argued.

Justice Chandurkar on Friday said he agreed with the opinion given by Justice Patel (now retired).

On April 6, 2023, the Union government promulgated amendments to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, including a provision for an FCU to flag fake, false or misleading online content related to the government.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-stays-indian-governments-notification-of-fact-check-unit-702602">Also read |&nbsp;Supreme Court stays Indian government's notification of Fact Check Unit</a>

Under the IT Rules, if the FCU comes across any posts that are fake, false, and contain misleading facts about the business of the government, it would flag the same to social media intermediaries.

Once such a post is flagged, the intermediary has the option of either taking down the post or putting a disclaimer on the same.

In taking the second option, the intermediary loses its safe harbour/immunity and stands liable for legal action.

Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

The Bombay High Court on Friday (Sep 20) struck down the amended Information Technology (IT) Rules which sought to identify fake and false content on social media against the government by terming it 'unconstitutional'.

The Bombay High Court on Friday (Sep 20) struck down the amended Information Technology (IT) Rules which sought to identify fake and false content on social media against the government by terming it 'unconstitutional'. The matter was assigned to Justice AS Chandurkar as ‘tie-breaker judge’, after a division bench in January 2024 delivered a split verdict on the petitions challenging the amended IT rules. Justice Chandurkar on Friday held that the rules violated constitutional provisions. "I have considered the matter extensively. The impugned rules are violative of Article 14 (right to equality), 19 (freedom of speech and expression) and 19(1)(g) (freedom and right to profession) of the Constitution of India," the judge said. The expression "fake, false and misleading" in the Rules was "vague and hence wrong" in the absence of any definition, he added. With this ruling, the High Court allowed the petitions filed by stand-up comedian Kunal Kamra and others challenging the new rules, including the provision to set up a Fact Checking Unit (FCU) to identify fake or false content about the government. The petitions against the IT Rules were referred to Justice Chandurkar after a division bench of Justices Gautam Patel and Neela Gokhale delivered a split verdict in January. Watch | Anti-India Campaign in Bangladesh: New Delhi Fact Checks Flooding Claim × While Justice Patel struck down the Rules, Justice Gokhale upheld them. Justice Patel had said the Rules amounted to censorship, but Justice Gokhale had opined they did not have any 'chilling effect' on free speech as argued. Justice Chandurkar on Friday said he agreed with the opinion given by Justice Patel (now retired). On April 6, 2023, the Union government promulgated amendments to the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, including a provision for an FCU to flag fake, false or misleading online content related to the government. Also read | Supreme Court stays Indian government's notification of Fact Check Unit Under the IT Rules, if the FCU comes across any posts that are fake, false, and contain misleading facts about the business of the government, it would flag the same to social media intermediaries. Once such a post is flagged, the intermediary has the option of either taking down the post or putting a disclaimer on the same. In taking the second option, the intermediary loses its safe harbour/immunity and stands liable for legal action. Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

Bombay HC quashes Indian government's bid to establish Fact-Checking Units

There is still no relief for Kangana Ranaut's Emergency and the release date of the film still remains undecided. On Wednesday, the Bombay High Court refused to order a certification from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for the movie.

A division bench of Justices BP Colabawalla and Firdosh Pooniwalla stated that they cannot issue any directions as the Madhya Pradesh High Court has already ordered the censor board to consider the objections raised around the movie before certifying it. 
 
“The Madhya Pradesh HC has given the CBFC a direction. If we give any relief today then it would be directly in contravention to that order. We will be asking CBFC to breach another HC order if we pass any order today. We cannot do that. Judicial propriety demands that of us,” the bench reportedly has said. 
 
The Bombay High Court has asked the censor board to consider the objections raised against the film and then certify it by September 18. 
 
“We know that there is something else happening behind. We don't want to comment on it. The CBFC shall consider the objections and take a decision by September 18,” it said.&nbsp;The next hearing in the case will be held on September 19. 
 
A day earlier, Zee Entertainment Enterprises, the co-producer of the movie Emergency had approached the Bombay High Court to seek the film's release and a censor certificate. 
 
The petition filed in the high court said that the censor board “arbitrarily and illegally” withheld the film's censor certificate. The petition also claimed that the censor board was ready with the certificate but not issuing it. 
 
Emergency film release postponed 
 
The film was earlier scheduled to release on September 6. It stars Kangana Ranaut as former Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. The biographical drama is caught up in controversy after some Sikh organisations, including the Shiromani Akali Dal, objected, accusing it of misrepresenting the community and getting historical facts wrong. 
Ranaut, the BJP MP from Mandi in Himachal Pradesh, has directed and co-produced the film.&nbsp;

There is still no relief for Kangana Ranaut's Emergency and the release date of the film still remains undecided. On Wednesday, the Bombay High Court refused to order a certification from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for the movie.

There is still no relief for Kangana Ranaut's Emergency and the release date of the film still remains undecided. On Wednesday, the Bombay High Court refused to order a certification from the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for the movie. A division bench of Justices BP Colabawalla and Firdosh Pooniwalla stated that they cannot issue any directions as the Madhya Pradesh High Court has already ordered the censor board to consider the objections raised around the movie before certifying it. “The Madhya Pradesh HC has given the CBFC a direction. If we give any relief today then it would be directly in contravention to that order. We will be asking CBFC to breach another HC order if we pass any order today. We cannot do that. Judicial propriety demands that of us,” the bench reportedly has said. The Bombay High Court has asked the censor board to consider the objections raised against the film and then certify it by September 18. “We know that there is something else happening behind. We don't want to comment on it. The CBFC shall consider the objections and take a decision by September 18,” it said. The next hearing in the case will be held on September 19. A day earlier, Zee Entertainment Enterprises, the co-producer of the movie Emergency had approached the Bombay High Court to seek the film's release and a censor certificate. The petition filed in the high court said that the censor board “arbitrarily and illegally” withheld the film's censor certificate. The petition also claimed that the censor board was ready with the certificate but not issuing it. Emergency film release postponed The film was earlier scheduled to release on September 6. It stars Kangana Ranaut as former Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi. The biographical drama is caught up in controversy after some Sikh organisations, including the Shiromani Akali Dal, objected, accusing it of misrepresenting the community and getting historical facts wrong. Ranaut, the BJP MP from Mandi in Himachal Pradesh, has directed and co-produced the film.

Emergency row: No relief for Kangana Ranaut's film yet as Bombay HC refuses to order certification

After taking the suo motu cognisance of the alleged Badlapur sexual assault case of two four-year-old girls, a division bench of Bombay High Court on Thursday (August 22) comprising Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj Chavan described the incident as "extremely shocking".&nbsp;

Justice Mohite-Dere , while questioning the safety in schools, remarked, "If the school is not a safe place, then what is the use of speaking about right to education and such things. Even 4-year-old girls are not being spared. What is this situation? It is extremely shocking."

The alleged sexual assault of the two kindergarten students by a male attendant sparked a massive protest in Badlapur on Tuesday (August 20).&nbsp;

The authorities on Wednesday (August 21) suspended internet services in the town. Police said they have arrested 72 persons in connection with the violence during the stir.&nbsp;

The male attendant, who was arrested on August 17, allegedly assaulted the kids in the school's toilet.&nbsp;

A local court on Wednesday extended the accused police custody till August 26.

The court issued an order expecting the provision of all legal assistance to the survivors and their families.&nbsp;

Also watch |&nbsp;Badlapur Sexual Assault Case: Bombay High Court hears matter after Suo Moto Congnisance

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/badlapur-sexual-assault-case-bombay-high-court-hears-matter-after-suo-moto-conginsance-752187/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Advocate General Birendra Saraf for the state government assured the court, "We will not only issue guidelines regarding student safety but also ensure their implementation in all schools. We will take all necessary measures to achieve this." He further stated that any dereliction of duty in the current case would result in strict action.&nbsp;

Justice Mohite-Dere expressed the court's expectations, stating, "We expect you not only record section 164 statements of the victim girls but also of the families. We want to see the case file by next date. We want to see what investigation was done by the Badlapur Police, on the next date itself."

(With inputs from agencies)

After taking the suo motu cognisance of the alleged Badlapur sexual assault case of two four-year-old girls, a division bench of Bombay High Court on Thursday (August 22) comprising Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj Chavan described the incident as "extremely shocking".

After taking the suo motu cognisance of the alleged Badlapur sexual assault case of two four-year-old girls, a division bench of Bombay High Court on Thursday (August 22) comprising Justices Revati Mohite Dere and Prithviraj Chavan described the incident as "extremely shocking". Justice Mohite-Dere , while questioning the safety in schools, remarked, "If the school is not a safe place, then what is the use of speaking about right to education and such things. Even 4-year-old girls are not being spared. What is this situation? It is extremely shocking." The alleged sexual assault of the two kindergarten students by a male attendant sparked a massive protest in Badlapur on Tuesday (August 20). The authorities on Wednesday (August 21) suspended internet services in the town. Police said they have arrested 72 persons in connection with the violence during the stir. The male attendant, who was arrested on August 17, allegedly assaulted the kids in the school's toilet. A local court on Wednesday extended the accused police custody till August 26. The court issued an order expecting the provision of all legal assistance to the survivors and their families. Also watch | Badlapur Sexual Assault Case: Bombay High Court hears matter after Suo Moto Congnisance × Advocate General Birendra Saraf for the state government assured the court, "We will not only issue guidelines regarding student safety but also ensure their implementation in all schools. We will take all necessary measures to achieve this." He further stated that any dereliction of duty in the current case would result in strict action. Justice Mohite-Dere expressed the court's expectations, stating, "We expect you not only record section 164 statements of the victim girls but also of the families. We want to see the case file by next date. We want to see what investigation was done by the Badlapur Police, on the next date itself." (With inputs from agencies)

Badlapur case: Bombay High Court slams police for delayed action amid public outcry

Pulling a woman’s hair or pushing her during a quarrel does not count as outraging her modesty, the Bombay High Court said on Monday (Aug 5)&nbsp;while hearing a petition.

The petition was filed to seek invocation of section 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against five disciples of self-proclaimed godman Dhirendra Shahstra, better-known as Bageshwar Baba.&nbsp;

The division bench of justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan believed that molestation must include an intention to outrage a woman’s modesty and refused to issue orders to book the five disciples – Abhijit Karanjule, Mayuresh Kulkarni, Ishwar Gunjal, Avinash Pandey and Laxman Pant – under IPC section 354.

<h2>What is the case?</h2>

As per the petitioner Nitin Upadhyay, the five disciples had allegedly asked him to make a video claiming he had asked for ₹3.5 crore ($416,867.50) from a Rajasthan-based follower of the godman to organise a programme.&nbsp;

Upadhyay was asked to do this after a viral video surfaced online in which the godman allegedly demanded ₹3.5 crore&nbsp;($416,867.50) for organising an event in any state.

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-rekha-sharma-steps-down-after-nine-year-tenure-as-ncw-chairperson-747818">India: Rekha Sharma steps down after nine-year tenure as NCW chairperson</a>

When Upadhyay refused to make such a video, the disciples allegedly assaulted him and “molested” his wife by pulling her hair and pushing her; they also slapped his minor child. Upadhyay&nbsp;subsequently complained to Mumbai Police, based on which an offence was registered under section 323 (causing simple hurt) and other relevant sections of the IPC.

The petitioner tried to bolster his case by claiming that his wife was treated badly by the disciples and filed a petition.

<h2>What does the court say?</h2>

On Monday, the court rejected Upadhyay’s petition, observing that “the woman has to say specifically what was done to outrage her modesty. Merely pulling hair and using criminal force does not mean outraging modesty.”

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/iit-madras-gets-historic-228-crore-donation-from-alumnus-747803">IIT Madras gets historic $271,000 donation from alumnus</a>

The court further said that in all rape cases, survivors usually accuse their perpetrators of “bad behaviour”, but they also explain in detail how this was done. “In this case, she only uses the words ‘bad behaviour’ but there is no explanation at all as to what it means,” the bench said.

The court also expressed satisfaction with the investigating agency for invoking the right sections under the IPC against the accused and refused to take the case any further.

(With inputs from agencies)

Pulling a woman’s hair or pushing her during a quarrel does not count as outraging her modesty, the Bombay High Court said on Monday (Aug 5) while hearing a petition.

Pulling a woman’s hair or pushing her during a quarrel does not count as outraging her modesty, the Bombay High Court said on Monday (Aug 5) while hearing a petition. The petition was filed to seek invocation of section 354 (assault or criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) against five disciples of self-proclaimed godman Dhirendra Shahstra, better-known as Bageshwar Baba. The division bench of justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Prithviraj Chavan believed that molestation must include an intention to outrage a woman’s modesty and refused to issue orders to book the five disciples – Abhijit Karanjule, Mayuresh Kulkarni, Ishwar Gunjal, Avinash Pandey and Laxman Pant – under IPC section 354. What is the case? As per the petitioner Nitin Upadhyay, the five disciples had allegedly asked him to make a video claiming he had asked for ₹3.5 crore ($416,867.50) from a Rajasthan-based follower of the godman to organise a programme. Upadhyay was asked to do this after a viral video surfaced online in which the godman allegedly demanded ₹3.5 crore ($416,867.50) for organising an event in any state. Also Read | India: Rekha Sharma steps down after nine-year tenure as NCW chairperson When Upadhyay refused to make such a video, the disciples allegedly assaulted him and “molested” his wife by pulling her hair and pushing her; they also slapped his minor child. Upadhyay subsequently complained to Mumbai Police, based on which an offence was registered under section 323 (causing simple hurt) and other relevant sections of the IPC. The petitioner tried to bolster his case by claiming that his wife was treated badly by the disciples and filed a petition. What does the court say? On Monday, the court rejected Upadhyay’s petition, observing that “the woman has to say specifically what was done to outrage her modesty. Merely pulling hair and using criminal force does not mean outraging modesty.” Also Read | IIT Madras gets historic $271,000 donation from alumnus The court further said that in all rape cases, survivors usually accuse their perpetrators of “bad behaviour”, but they also explain in detail how this was done. “In this case, she only uses the words ‘bad behaviour’ but there is no explanation at all as to what it means,” the bench said. The court also expressed satisfaction with the investigating agency for invoking the right sections under the IPC against the accused and refused to take the case any further. (With inputs from agencies)

Pulling hair, pushing a woman during quarrel does not mean outraging her modesty: Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court has ordered for the removal of actor Salman Khan's name as a respondent in a plea seeking CBI probe into the custodial death of an accused in a case of firing outside the actor's home.&nbsp; 
 
The accused, Anuj Thapan was found dead on May 1 inside the toilet of the crime branch police lock-up in Mumbai.&nbsp;

On Monday, a division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Shyam Chandak directed petitioner Rita Devi, mother of Thapan, to delete Khan's name from the petition. 
 
"Delete his name. Petitioner seeks leave to amend the petition to delete the name of respondent 4 as there is no pleading against him and no relief sought against him," the court said. 
 
Firing outside Salman Khan's residence&nbsp; 
 
On April 14, two motorbike-borne persons opened fire outside Bollywood superstar Salman Khan's residence in Bandra area of Mumbai. Days later, the alleged shooters - Vicky Gupta and Sagar Pal - were&nbsp;arrested from Gujarat. 
 
Thapan was arrested on April 26 from Punjab along with another person for allegedly supplying weapons to the shooters for firing at Khan's residence. 
 
While police claim Thapan killed himself, his mother Rita Devi in her petition filed on May 3 in the HC alleged foul play and claimed he was killed. 
 
In her plea, she sought the HC to direct the Central Bureau of Investigation to conduct a probe into her son's death. The petition said Thapan was physically assaulted and tortured by police in custody. 
 
Rita Devi had in her plea impleaded Khan as a respondent. 
 
The high court on Monday said no relief was sought against Khan in the petition and hence, there was no point in keeping the actor involved in the plea.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/lawrence-bishnois-gang-plot-to-kill-salman-khan-near-his-farmhouse-4-arrested-727654">Navi Mumbai Police bust plot to kill Salman Khan near his farmhouse, 4 arrested</a> 
 
"What is the point of making a person who is supposed to be the victim a party respondent? We see no reason why respondent 4 should continue to be in this plea. He is not a necessary party," the bench said.

The HC noted the petitioner's concern was the death of her son, but there was no point in making Khan a respondent in the plea.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/bollywood/news-salman-khan-firing-incident-mumbai-police-invoke-mcoca-against-four-accused-715876">Salman Khan house firing case: Accused Anuj Thapan dies in police custody&nbsp;</a>

"You are concerned with the death of your son...that the court will look into...but what is the point of impleading respondent 4 in the plea," the bench asked.

"This is too far-fetched. No relief is sought against him and no averment or allegation is made against him," the court added.

The petitioner's advocate told the court that while they are not seeking any relief in their plea against the actor, he should be part of the probe being carried out by the state Crime Investigation Department into Thapan's death. The court said it is for the CID to decide. 
 
(With&nbsp;inputs from agencies)

The Bombay High Court has ordered for the removal of actor Salman Khan's name as a respondent in a plea seeking CBI probe into the custodial death of an accused in a case of firing outside the actor's home.

The Bombay High Court has ordered for the removal of actor Salman Khan's name as a respondent in a plea seeking CBI probe into the custodial death of an accused in a case of firing outside the actor's home. The accused, Anuj Thapan was found dead on May 1 inside the toilet of the crime branch police lock-up in Mumbai. On Monday, a division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Shyam Chandak directed petitioner Rita Devi, mother of Thapan, to delete Khan's name from the petition. "Delete his name. Petitioner seeks leave to amend the petition to delete the name of respondent 4 as there is no pleading against him and no relief sought against him," the court said. Firing outside Salman Khan's residence On April 14, two motorbike-borne persons opened fire outside Bollywood superstar Salman Khan's residence in Bandra area of Mumbai. Days later, the alleged shooters - Vicky Gupta and Sagar Pal - were arrested from Gujarat. Thapan was arrested on April 26 from Punjab along with another person for allegedly supplying weapons to the shooters for firing at Khan's residence. While police claim Thapan killed himself, his mother Rita Devi in her petition filed on May 3 in the HC alleged foul play and claimed he was killed. In her plea, she sought the HC to direct the Central Bureau of Investigation to conduct a probe into her son's death. The petition said Thapan was physically assaulted and tortured by police in custody. Rita Devi had in her plea impleaded Khan as a respondent. The high court on Monday said no relief was sought against Khan in the petition and hence, there was no point in keeping the actor involved in the plea. Navi Mumbai Police bust plot to kill Salman Khan near his farmhouse, 4 arrested "What is the point of making a person who is supposed to be the victim a party respondent? We see no reason why respondent 4 should continue to be in this plea. He is not a necessary party," the bench said. The HC noted the petitioner's concern was the death of her son, but there was no point in making Khan a respondent in the plea. Salman Khan house firing case: Accused Anuj Thapan dies in police custody "You are concerned with the death of your son...that the court will look into...but what is the point of impleading respondent 4 in the plea," the bench asked. "This is too far-fetched. No relief is sought against him and no averment or allegation is made against him," the court added. The petitioner's advocate told the court that while they are not seeking any relief in their plea against the actor, he should be part of the probe being carried out by the state Crime Investigation Department into Thapan's death. The court said it is for the CID to decide. (With inputs from agencies)

Salman Khan house firing case: HC orders removal of actor's name from plea over custodial death of accused

The Bombay High Court, on Tuesday (Mar 5) acquitted former Delhi University professor GN Saibaba and five others accused in the Maoist link case. Meanwhile, the Maharashtra state government moved the Supreme Court to challenge Bombay High Court’s verdict.&nbsp;

<h2>What did the Bombay High Court say?</h2>

The bench of the Bombay High Court comprising justices Vinay Joshi and Valmiki SA Menezes rejected the 2017 verdict by a sessions court in Maharashtra’s city of Nagpur which convicted Saibaba and others.

The Bombay High Court acquitted GN Saibaba, Hem Mishra, Mahesh Tirkey, Vijay Tirkey, Narayan Sanglikar, Prashant Rahi and Pandu Narote (who died in 2022 due to swine flu).&nbsp;

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/bengaluru-prison-radicalisation-case-nia-launches-17-raids-in-7-indian-states-696714">Bengaluru prison radicalisation case: NIA launches 17 raids in 7 Indian states</a>

The six people had been arrested and convicted under various sections of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for alleged Maoist links and were accused of aiding and abetting Maoist activities in March 2017.

However, the bench said it was acquitting all the accused in the case since the prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt against them. The Bombay High Court said that the accused could be released from prison after paying a fine of Rs 50,000 (approx. $603).&nbsp;

“The prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the case against the accused persons,” the high court said. It held as “null and void” the sanction procured by the prosecution to charge the accused under the anti-terror law, UAPA.

The Bombay High Court also acquitted Saibaba, 54, and set aside the life sentence imposed on him noting that the prosecution failed to prove the case against the former Delhi University professor.&nbsp;

The 54-year-old is wheelchair-bound due to physical disability and has been lodged in the Nagpur Central Jail since his arrest in relation to the case in 2014.&nbsp;

<h2>Maharashtra govt to move the Supreme Court</h2>

While the prosecution did not seek the high court to stay its order, the Maharashtra government, on Tuesday approached the Supreme Court to challenge the Bombay High Court verdict of acquitting all those accused in the case, reported news agency PTI.&nbsp;

Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/abhijit-gangopadhyay-resigns-as-calcutta-high-court-judge-to-join-bjp-696848">Abhijit Gangopadhyay resigns as Calcutta high court judge, to join BJP</a>

The case stems from accusations against Saibaba and five others for alleged Maoist links and supposedly indulging in activities amounting to waging war against the country.

The recent verdict comes after another bench of the high court acquitted Saibaba, in 2022, saying that the trial proceedings were “null and void” in the absence of a valid sanction under the UAPA.

At the time, the Maharashtra government, on the same day, had moved the Supreme Court to challenge the decision. The apex court had initially set aside the high court order and ordered it to hear the appeal filed by Saibaba again.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies) 
&nbsp;

The Bombay High Court, on Tuesday (Mar 5) acquitted former Delhi University professor GN Saibaba and five others accused in the Maoist link case. Meanwhile, the Maharashtra state government moved the Supreme Court to challenge Bombay High Court’s verdict.

The Bombay High Court, on Tuesday (Mar 5) acquitted former Delhi University professor GN Saibaba and five others accused in the Maoist link case. Meanwhile, the Maharashtra state government moved the Supreme Court to challenge Bombay High Court’s verdict. What did the Bombay High Court say? The bench of the Bombay High Court comprising justices Vinay Joshi and Valmiki SA Menezes rejected the 2017 verdict by a sessions court in Maharashtra’s city of Nagpur which convicted Saibaba and others. The Bombay High Court acquitted GN Saibaba, Hem Mishra, Mahesh Tirkey, Vijay Tirkey, Narayan Sanglikar, Prashant Rahi and Pandu Narote (who died in 2022 due to swine flu). Also Read | Bengaluru prison radicalisation case: NIA launches 17 raids in 7 Indian states The six people had been arrested and convicted under various sections of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) and the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for alleged Maoist links and were accused of aiding and abetting Maoist activities in March 2017. However, the bench said it was acquitting all the accused in the case since the prosecution had failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt against them. The Bombay High Court said that the accused could be released from prison after paying a fine of Rs 50,000 (approx. $603). “The prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the case against the accused persons,” the high court said. It held as “null and void” the sanction procured by the prosecution to charge the accused under the anti-terror law, UAPA. The Bombay High Court also acquitted Saibaba, 54, and set aside the life sentence imposed on him noting that the prosecution failed to prove the case against the former Delhi University professor. The 54-year-old is wheelchair-bound due to physical disability and has been lodged in the Nagpur Central Jail since his arrest in relation to the case in 2014. Maharashtra govt to move the Supreme Court While the prosecution did not seek the high court to stay its order, the Maharashtra government, on Tuesday approached the Supreme Court to challenge the Bombay High Court verdict of acquitting all those accused in the case, reported news agency PTI. Also Read | Abhijit Gangopadhyay resigns as Calcutta high court judge, to join BJP The case stems from accusations against Saibaba and five others for alleged Maoist links and supposedly indulging in activities amounting to waging war against the country. The recent verdict comes after another bench of the high court acquitted Saibaba, in 2022, saying that the trial proceedings were “null and void” in the absence of a valid sanction under the UAPA. At the time, the Maharashtra government, on the same day, had moved the Supreme Court to challenge the decision. The apex court had initially set aside the high court order and ordered it to hear the appeal filed by Saibaba again. (With inputs from agencies)

India: Bombay High Court acquits Delhi University ex-professor Saibaba, 5 others in Maoist links case

OTT platform Netflix on Thursday told the Bombay High Court that it will not air the documentary The Indrani Mukerjea Story: Buried Truth' on February 23 on its platform. The streaming platform has assured the court that it will wait till February 29 when the court will hear a plea by the Central Bureau of Investigation against the same.&nbsp; 
 
The platform has also notified the court that it will arrange to screen the series for representatives of the central agency and as well as the judges.&nbsp; 
 
The docuseries on Mukerjea, the prime accused in the sensational Sheena Bora murder case, was to be released this Friday-&nbsp;&nbsp;February 23. 
 
A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Justice Manjusha A Deshpande heard CBI's plea on Thursday after the investigative body approached the high court seeking a stay on the release of the docuseries. The CBI had appealed earlier to the special court but the plea was rejected on Tuesday. 
 
Netflix said it had no objection to the court’s suggestion that the CBI be allowed to view the series. The high court had asked whether the witnesses who have featured in the series have been examined by the special court in the ongoing trial of the Sheena Bora murder case.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/netflix-releases-trailer-of-the-indrani-mukerjea-story-buried-truth-watch-689613">Netflix releases trailer of The Indrani Mukerjea Story: Buried Truth. Watch</a> 
 
The advocate representing Netflix has submitted the list of witnesses who feature in the series. Five are part of the series including Mukerjea’s son Mikhail Bora, a person who identified the spot where the body was burnt, and a police officer. 
 
Additional Solicitor General Devang Vyas and advocate Shreeram Shirsat for CBI also submitted a list of probable witnesses yet to be examined. 
 
Justice Dere had previously questioned Netflix as to why the CBI was not allowed to view the series.

“She is an accused. It is her depiction. One of the bail conditions is not to tamper with evidence. When you sort of interview people in support of your case…What is the difficulty in sharing the docuseries? Whether there is a right of the victim?," the court observed. 
 
“Trial is ongoing, we want to know if an accused has a right. We are asking you, before we hear you (Netflix), why cannot the CBI watch the series? Because somewhere down the line, evidence is being recorded and witnesses are being examined,” the judge asked parties to the case. 
 
Advocate Kadam who is representing Netflix also argued that the CBI cannot approach the court at the last minute seeking postponement of the airing of the series and added that there was no gag order against witnesses.

“It can be deferred by a week, heavens are not going to fall. They (CBI) are not saying postpone it, we are saying it. They have not even opened the argument. But till then, you will not release the series,” Justice Dere said on&nbsp;the argument by&nbsp;Kadam.

OTT platform Netflix on Thursday told the Bombay High Court that it will not air the documentary The Indrani Mukerjea Story: Buried Truth' on February 23 on its platform.

OTT platform Netflix on Thursday told the Bombay High Court that it will not air the documentary The Indrani Mukerjea Story: Buried Truth' on February 23 on its platform. The streaming platform has assured the court that it will wait till February 29 when the court will hear a plea by the Central Bureau of Investigation against the same. The platform has also notified the court that it will arrange to screen the series for representatives of the central agency and as well as the judges. The docuseries on Mukerjea, the prime accused in the sensational Sheena Bora murder case, was to be released this Friday- February 23. A division bench of Justices Revati Mohite-Dere and Justice Manjusha A Deshpande heard CBI's plea on Thursday after the investigative body approached the high court seeking a stay on the release of the docuseries. The CBI had appealed earlier to the special court but the plea was rejected on Tuesday. Netflix said it had no objection to the court’s suggestion that the CBI be allowed to view the series. The high court had asked whether the witnesses who have featured in the series have been examined by the special court in the ongoing trial of the Sheena Bora murder case. Netflix releases trailer of The Indrani Mukerjea Story: Buried Truth. Watch The advocate representing Netflix has submitted the list of witnesses who feature in the series. Five are part of the series including Mukerjea’s son Mikhail Bora, a person who identified the spot where the body was burnt, and a police officer. Additional Solicitor General Devang Vyas and advocate Shreeram Shirsat for CBI also submitted a list of probable witnesses yet to be examined. Justice Dere had previously questioned Netflix as to why the CBI was not allowed to view the series. “She is an accused. It is her depiction. One of the bail conditions is not to tamper with evidence. When you sort of interview people in support of your case…What is the difficulty in sharing the docuseries? Whether there is a right of the victim?," the court observed. “Trial is ongoing, we want to know if an accused has a right. We are asking you, before we hear you (Netflix), why cannot the CBI watch the series? Because somewhere down the line, evidence is being recorded and witnesses are being examined,” the judge asked parties to the case. Advocate Kadam who is representing Netflix also argued that the CBI cannot approach the court at the last minute seeking postponement of the airing of the series and added that there was no gag order against witnesses. “It can be deferred by a week, heavens are not going to fall. They (CBI) are not saying postpone it, we are saying it. They have not even opened the argument. But till then, you will not release the series,” Justice Dere said on the argument by Kadam.

Netflix to halt docu-series release on Indrani Mukerjea's case till Feb 29 after CBI moves court

In a historic ruling, the Bombay High Court denied a petition calling for an outright ban on Indian nationals, businesses, and organizations hiring Pakistani performers, singers, actors, musicians, lyricists, and technicians.

Pak Artists Ban in India: Bombay court rejects plea to ban Pakistani artists from working in India

The Bombay High Court, in a landmark decision, has dismissed a petition seeking a comprehensive ban on Indian citizens, companies, and associations from engaging Pakistani artists, including actors, singers, musicians, lyricists, and technicians.

A division bench of Justice Sunil B Shukre and Justice Firdosh P Pooniwalla firmly stated that the petition represents a "retrograde step in promoting cultural harmony, unity, and peace, and has no merit in it."

The petitioner, a cine worker, had sought directions from the Information and Broadcasting Ministry, the Ministry of External Affairs, and the Ministry of Home Affairs to issue appropriate notifications imposing a ban and prohibiting the granting of visas to Pakistani artists working in India.

The plea cited the resolution passed by the All-Indian Cine Workers Association (AICWA) in the aftermath of the Pulwama terror attacks, along with similar resolutions by the Indian Motion Pictures Producers Association (IMPPA) and the Federation of Western Indian Cine Employees (FWICE), which banned Pakistani artists from the Indian film industry. The MNS Cinema Wing also cautioned filmmakers against hiring Pakistani artists.

Advocate Vibhav Krishna, representing the petitioner, argued that allowing Pakistani artists to work in India could lead to discrimination against Indian artists. He contended that the favourable environment available to Pakistani artists in India is not reciprocated for Indian artists in Pakistan. According to Krishna, the ban is essential to prevent the exploitation of commercial opportunities by Pakistani artists in India, which could potentially deprive Indian artists of similar opportunities.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/bollywood/news-indian-actor-dalip-tahil-sentenced-to-2-months-of-jail-for-2018-drunk-driving-case-649840">Indian actor Dalip Tahil sentenced to 2 months of jail for 2018 drunk driving case</a>

However, the Bombay High Court deemed the petitioner's stance misplaced, emphasising the importance of cultural harmony and peace between nations. The court underlined that patriotism should not breed hostility but, rather, should foster unity and cultural exchanges.

The court further pointed out that the resolutions passed by private associations, although expressing a sentiment, lacked statutory force and could not be enforced through judicial orders. The judges asserted that enforcing such bans would contravene the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution.

Additionally, the court highlighted the "positive steps" taken by the Indian government in promoting international peace and security. It cited the example of allowing the Pakistani cricket team to participate in the World Cricket Cup held in India, asserting that entertaining such petitions would undermine such efforts.

WATCH WION LIVE HERE

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" loading="”lazy”" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

The Bombay High Court, in a landmark decision, has dismissed a petition seeking a comprehensive ban on Indian citizens, companies, and associations from engaging Pakistani artists, including actors, singers, musicians, lyricists, and technicians.

The Bombay High Court, in a landmark decision, has dismissed a petition seeking a comprehensive ban on Indian citizens, companies, and associations from engaging Pakistani artists, including actors, singers, musicians, lyricists, and technicians. A division bench of Justice Sunil B Shukre and Justice Firdosh P Pooniwalla firmly stated that the petition represents a "retrograde step in promoting cultural harmony, unity, and peace, and has no merit in it." The petitioner, a cine worker, had sought directions from the Information and Broadcasting Ministry, the Ministry of External Affairs, and the Ministry of Home Affairs to issue appropriate notifications imposing a ban and prohibiting the granting of visas to Pakistani artists working in India. The plea cited the resolution passed by the All-Indian Cine Workers Association (AICWA) in the aftermath of the Pulwama terror attacks, along with similar resolutions by the Indian Motion Pictures Producers Association (IMPPA) and the Federation of Western Indian Cine Employees (FWICE), which banned Pakistani artists from the Indian film industry. The MNS Cinema Wing also cautioned filmmakers against hiring Pakistani artists. Advocate Vibhav Krishna, representing the petitioner, argued that allowing Pakistani artists to work in India could lead to discrimination against Indian artists. He contended that the favourable environment available to Pakistani artists in India is not reciprocated for Indian artists in Pakistan. According to Krishna, the ban is essential to prevent the exploitation of commercial opportunities by Pakistani artists in India, which could potentially deprive Indian artists of similar opportunities. Also read: Indian actor Dalip Tahil sentenced to 2 months of jail for 2018 drunk driving case However, the Bombay High Court deemed the petitioner's stance misplaced, emphasising the importance of cultural harmony and peace between nations. The court underlined that patriotism should not breed hostility but, rather, should foster unity and cultural exchanges. The court further pointed out that the resolutions passed by private associations, although expressing a sentiment, lacked statutory force and could not be enforced through judicial orders. The judges asserted that enforcing such bans would contravene the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution. Additionally, the court highlighted the "positive steps" taken by the Indian government in promoting international peace and security. It cited the example of allowing the Pakistani cricket team to participate in the World Cricket Cup held in India, asserting that entertaining such petitions would undermine such efforts. WATCH WION LIVE HERE You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

Bombay HC rejects plea to ban Pakistani artists from working in India

bombay-high-court

Bombay High Court, News on Bombay High Court, stories on Bombay High Court, articles on Bombay High Court, Bombay High Court stories at Wion, Bombay High Court news, Bombay High Court latest news

bombay high-court

Bombay HC pulls up Maharashtra FDA over Cadila drug ban, says powers must be used judiciously

Bombay HC orders takedown of allegedly defamatory posts on Nitin Gadkari

Bombay High Court canteens fail FDA inspection after judges question crackdown

NEET Paper Leak Crackdown | Maharashtra Launches 23 Fast-Track Courts For Exam Fraud Cases

NEET Paper Leak Fallout | Maharashtra Sets Up 23 Fast-Track Courts To Hear 203 Exam Fraud Cases

Bombay HC denies maintenance plea of woman earning more than husband

Bombay HC cancels Shiv Sena leader's bail | Abhishek Banerjee office demolished | Commonwealth Games

‘Wake up: Bombay HC pulls up BMC over Mumbai’s potholed roads, open manholes

SIT demand grows over Ajit Pawar plane tragedy; PIL filed in Bombay High Court

Breaking: Vijay Mallya Tells Bombay Court He Has No Definite Date To Return To India | WION

Bombay High Court denies abortion plea to 28-week pregnant rape survivor

Malnutrition still killing in Maharashtra’s tribal belt

Bombay HC to Mallya: Return to India or Your Plea Won't Be Heard

Bombay High Court clears ex-BrahMos scientist Nishant Agarwal of espionage charges, reduces sentence

Court bars Shilpa Shetty, Raj Kundra from foreign travel without ₹60 cr deposit

'Short-sighted, be patriots': Bombay HC admonishes CPI(M) over Gaza petition

Mumbai train blasts: How series of explosions shook the world 9 years ago

Bombay HC grants bail to man in minor's rape case, says she 'voluntarily' joined him

Ex-SEBI Chief Madhabi Puri Buch gets 4-week relief from Bombay High Court

Forcing daughter-in-law to sleep on carpet, verbal abuse not cruelty: Bombay High Court

Kangana Ranaut's Emergency can release but with certain cuts, says CBFC to Bombay HC

'Cannot be termed an encounter': Bombay HC pulls up Mumbai Police over Badlapur accused’s death

Bombay HC quashes Indian government's bid to establish Fact-Checking Units

Emergency row: No relief for Kangana Ranaut's film yet as Bombay HC refuses to order certification

Badlapur case: Bombay High Court slams police for delayed action amid public outcry

Pulling hair, pushing a woman during quarrel does not mean outraging her modesty: Bombay HC