Indian politician and Shiv Sena MLA Aaditya Thackeray has moved the Bombay High Court seeking to be heard before any order is passed in a public interest litigation demanding a CBI probe in connection with the deaths of actor Sushant Singh Rajput and his former manager Disha Salian. 
 
In his application filed on October 13, Thackeray said the PIL would not be considered as a probe by state machinery was already on in the matter. 
 
The PIL, filed by the ‘Supreme Court &amp; High Court Litigants Association of India’ through its president Rashid Khan Pathan in September, demanded the immediate arrest of Thackeray in connection with the “mysterious” deaths of Disha Salian and Sushant Singh Rajput. 
 
The PIL has not yet been taken up for hearing by HC. 
 
“We have filed an intervention application saying we should be heard before any order is passed. We have said the PIL is not maintainable as the investigation in Sushant Singh Rajput matter is already on by CBI,” Thackeray's lawyer told media.&nbsp;

“How can any order be passed in a PIL when a state machinery is already seized of the probe,” he added. 
 
The PIL sought a probe against Thackeray by the CBI in relation to the two cases. Thackeray has served as a state minister in the Maharashtra government in previous years.&nbsp;

Sushant Singh Rajput death case 
 
Sushant Singh Rajput was found dead in his apartment in suburban Bandra on June 14, 2020. An initial probe by the Mumbai police stated that it was a case of suicide. However, in July, the actor's father filed a case against actress Rhea Chakraborty and her family, accusing them of abetment to suicide. Rhea and Sushant were a couple during the time of Sushant's death. 
 
The case was later transferred to the CBI, which is presently carrying out a probe in the city. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) is probing allegations of money laundering against Rhea and her family, while the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) is looking into claims that Rhea used to consume drugs and had also given the same to Rajput.

Disha Salian, a former manager of Rajput, died on June 8, 2020, after falling off the 14th floor of a residential building in suburban Malad in Mumbai.&nbsp;

(With agency inputs)&nbsp;

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=&quot;100%&quot;"></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>.

Indian politician and Shiv Sena MLA Aaditya Thackeray has moved the Bombay High Court seeking to be heard before any order is passed in a public interest litigation demanding a CBI probe in connection with the deaths of actor Sushant Singh Rajput and his former manager Disha Salian.

Indian politician and Shiv Sena MLA Aaditya Thackeray has moved the Bombay High Court seeking to be heard before any order is passed in a public interest litigation demanding a CBI probe in connection with the deaths of actor Sushant Singh Rajput and his former manager Disha Salian. In his application filed on October 13, Thackeray said the PIL would not be considered as a probe by state machinery was already on in the matter. The PIL, filed by the ‘Supreme Court & High Court Litigants Association of India’ through its president Rashid Khan Pathan in September, demanded the immediate arrest of Thackeray in connection with the “mysterious” deaths of Disha Salian and Sushant Singh Rajput. The PIL has not yet been taken up for hearing by HC. “We have filed an intervention application saying we should be heard before any order is passed. We have said the PIL is not maintainable as the investigation in Sushant Singh Rajput matter is already on by CBI,” Thackeray's lawyer told media. “How can any order be passed in a PIL when a state machinery is already seized of the probe,” he added. The PIL sought a probe against Thackeray by the CBI in relation to the two cases. Thackeray has served as a state minister in the Maharashtra government in previous years. Sushant Singh Rajput death case Sushant Singh Rajput was found dead in his apartment in suburban Bandra on June 14, 2020. An initial probe by the Mumbai police stated that it was a case of suicide. However, in July, the actor's father filed a case against actress Rhea Chakraborty and her family, accusing them of abetment to suicide. Rhea and Sushant were a couple during the time of Sushant's death. The case was later transferred to the CBI, which is presently carrying out a probe in the city. The Enforcement Directorate (ED) is probing allegations of money laundering against Rhea and her family, while the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) is looking into claims that Rhea used to consume drugs and had also given the same to Rajput. Disha Salian, a former manager of Rajput, died on June 8, 2020, after falling off the 14th floor of a residential building in suburban Malad in Mumbai. (With agency inputs) 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.

Sushant Singh Rajput death case: Aditya Thackeray seeks Bombay HC's intervention

An Indian court on Thursday (Sept 21) dismissed pleas filed by economic offender Mehul Choksi aimed at challenging efforts of India’s top economic intelligence agency, the Enforcement Directorate (ED), to declare him a Fugitive Economic Offender (FEO).

Choksi is an accused in the PNB bank scam case, along with billionaire jeweller Nirav Modi, who is the promoter of Gitanjali Gems. Choksi and Modi have been accused of getting letters of undertaking (LoU) and foreign letters of credit (FLC) of Rs 12,636 crore issued in favour of foreign branches of Indian banks based on fraudulent claims.

It is to be noted that Modi was declared an FEO in December 2019, and now the ED is seeking to pursue a similar case against Choksi as well.

<h2>Choksi alleges procedural lapses in ED’s proceedings</h2>

Justice Sarang V Kotwal of the Bombay High Court concluded a hearing on September 11 in Choksi's pleas and reserved the order. In his pleas, Choksi alleged procedural lapses in the proceedings before the special court designated under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

Watch:&nbsp;Nigeria: Indian diaspora celebrates Ganesha Chaturthi in Lagos as festival goes global

<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/nigeria-indian-diaspora-celebrates-ganesha-chaturthi-in-lagos-as-festival-goes-global-wion-638054/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

In January 2020, the HC initially provided temporary relief to Choksi by preventing the special court from issuing a final order on the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) application to label Choksi as a Fugitive Economic Offender (FEO). This injunction was repeatedly extended until Friday.

In 2019, the ED submitted an application to the PMLA Court, seeking to declare Choksi as an FEO under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018, and seize his assets.&nbsp;

<h2>Who can be declared as FEO?</h2>

According to Indian laws, a person can be declared an FEO if a warrant is issued against them for an offence involving Rs 100 crore or more and if they have left the country and refused to return.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/amid-nijjar-row-india-suspends-visas-for-canadians-as-tensions-rise-between-the-two-countries-638125">Also read:&nbsp;Amid Nijjar row, India suspends visas for Canadians as tensions rise between the two countries</a>

Choksi had subsequently approached the HC to challenge the ED's application, filing two petitions: one seeking the dismissal of the central agency's application and the other seeking permission to cross-examine the investigating officers and individuals whose statements the investigative agency relied upon to declare Choksi as an FEO.

<h2>ED’s argument</h2>

Last month, the agency also approached the HC to review the stay on proceedings to declare Choksi an FEO.&nbsp;

The agency argued that Choksi is accused under the PMLA Act, and prosecution against him is pending due to the HC's stay. It urged Justice Kotwal to make a final decision on the petitions promptly.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
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>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

&nbsp;

An Indian court on Thursday (Sept 21) dismissed pleas filed by economic offender Mehul Choksi aimed at challenging efforts of India’s top economic intelligence agency, the Enforcement Directorate (ED), to declare him a Fugitive Economic Offender (FEO).

An Indian court on Thursday (Sept 21) dismissed pleas filed by economic offender Mehul Choksi aimed at challenging efforts of India’s top economic intelligence agency, the Enforcement Directorate (ED), to declare him a Fugitive Economic Offender (FEO). Choksi is an accused in the PNB bank scam case, along with billionaire jeweller Nirav Modi, who is the promoter of Gitanjali Gems. Choksi and Modi have been accused of getting letters of undertaking (LoU) and foreign letters of credit (FLC) of Rs 12,636 crore issued in favour of foreign branches of Indian banks based on fraudulent claims. It is to be noted that Modi was declared an FEO in December 2019, and now the ED is seeking to pursue a similar case against Choksi as well. Choksi alleges procedural lapses in ED’s proceedings Justice Sarang V Kotwal of the Bombay High Court concluded a hearing on September 11 in Choksi's pleas and reserved the order. In his pleas, Choksi alleged procedural lapses in the proceedings before the special court designated under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA). Watch: Nigeria: Indian diaspora celebrates Ganesha Chaturthi in Lagos as festival goes global × In January 2020, the HC initially provided temporary relief to Choksi by preventing the special court from issuing a final order on the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) application to label Choksi as a Fugitive Economic Offender (FEO). This injunction was repeatedly extended until Friday. In 2019, the ED submitted an application to the PMLA Court, seeking to declare Choksi as an FEO under the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018, and seize his assets. Who can be declared as FEO? According to Indian laws, a person can be declared an FEO if a warrant is issued against them for an offence involving Rs 100 crore or more and if they have left the country and refused to return. Also read: Amid Nijjar row, India suspends visas for Canadians as tensions rise between the two countries Choksi had subsequently approached the HC to challenge the ED's application, filing two petitions: one seeking the dismissal of the central agency's application and the other seeking permission to cross-examine the investigating officers and individuals whose statements the investigative agency relied upon to declare Choksi as an FEO. ED’s argument Last month, the agency also approached the HC to review the stay on proceedings to declare Choksi an FEO. The agency argued that Choksi is accused under the PMLA Act, and prosecution against him is pending due to the HC's stay. It urged Justice Kotwal to make a final decision on the petitions promptly. WATCH WION LIVE HERE ×

India: Court dismisses Mehul Choksi’s pleas against ED’s move to declare him ‘fugitive’

After presenting to the big screen stories of societal and political significance, like the National Award-winning "Uri: The Surgical Strike," "Sonchirya," "The Sky is Pink," "Rashmi Rocket," and "A Thursday," RSVP Movies is delighted to showcase one more true-life drama.

A movie about significant human rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra is being made by the production company&nbsp;Ronnie Screwvala, Abhishek Chaubey, and Honey Trehan. The Trehan-directed, yet-untitled movie, which stars actor-singer Diljit Dosanjh and is finished and ready for release, has run into an unexpected hurdle.

The necessary paperwork was finished following CBFC guidelines. After waiting for nearly six months, the producers of the biopic, at last, asked for a hearing before the Bombay High Court.

The police were given the power to detain anyone they suspected of being a terrorist following Operation Blue Star, Indira Gandhi's murder, and the 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots. It was alleged that the police planned shootouts where they killed helpless victims and then set hundreds of bodies on fire to cover up the crimes.

Khalra, the director of an Amritsar bank during the time of the Punjabi militancy, found evidence of police kidnapping, killing, and burning hundreds of unidentifiable victims. 2000 of their own cops reportedly perished at their hands for refusing to take part in these unlawful actions.

Following international indignation over the human rights activist's findings, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) launched an investigation. The federal body determined that the Punjab police had illegally cremated 2097 people in the Tarn Taran region of Punjab alone. Both the National Human Rights Commission and the Supreme Court of India have confirmed the accuracy of his statistics.

On September 6, 1995, Khalra vanished.&nbsp;His wife, Paramjit Kaur, filed a complaint, and a case of murder, kidnapping, and criminal conspiracy was filed. Four police officers were detained in connection with Khalra's disappearance: former head constable Prithipal Singh, former sub-inspectors Satnam Singh, Surinder Pal Singh, and Jasbir Singh. The Punjab&nbsp;government increased the seven-year sentence from the sessions court to a life sentence.

&nbsp;

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>.

After presenting to the big screen stories of societal and political significance, like the National Award-winning "Uri: The Surgical Strike," "Sonchirya," "The Sky is Pink," "Rashmi Rocket," and "A Thursday," RSVP Movies is delighted to showcase one more true-life drama.

After presenting to the big screen stories of societal and political significance, like the National Award-winning "Uri: The Surgical Strike," "Sonchirya," "The Sky is Pink," "Rashmi Rocket," and "A Thursday," RSVP Movies is delighted to showcase one more true-life drama. A movie about significant human rights activist Jaswant Singh Khalra is being made by the production company Ronnie Screwvala, Abhishek Chaubey, and Honey Trehan. The Trehan-directed, yet-untitled movie, which stars actor-singer Diljit Dosanjh and is finished and ready for release, has run into an unexpected hurdle. The necessary paperwork was finished following CBFC guidelines. After waiting for nearly six months, the producers of the biopic, at last, asked for a hearing before the Bombay High Court. The police were given the power to detain anyone they suspected of being a terrorist following Operation Blue Star, Indira Gandhi's murder, and the 1984 Anti-Sikh Riots. It was alleged that the police planned shootouts where they killed helpless victims and then set hundreds of bodies on fire to cover up the crimes. Khalra, the director of an Amritsar bank during the time of the Punjabi militancy, found evidence of police kidnapping, killing, and burning hundreds of unidentifiable victims. 2000 of their own cops reportedly perished at their hands for refusing to take part in these unlawful actions. Following international indignation over the human rights activist's findings, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) launched an investigation. The federal body determined that the Punjab police had illegally cremated 2097 people in the Tarn Taran region of Punjab alone. Both the National Human Rights Commission and the Supreme Court of India have confirmed the accuracy of his statistics. On September 6, 1995, Khalra vanished. His wife, Paramjit Kaur, filed a complaint, and a case of murder, kidnapping, and criminal conspiracy was filed. Four police officers were detained in connection with Khalra's disappearance: former head constable Prithipal Singh, former sub-inspectors Satnam Singh, Surinder Pal Singh, and Jasbir Singh. The Punjab government increased the seven-year sentence from the sessions court to a life sentence. 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.

Diljit Dosanjh's biopic based on Jaswant Singh Khalra: Bombay High Court to hold hearing today

"There is no legally enforceable fundamental right to a public holiday," the Bombay High Court recently said, "and whether or not to declare a particular day as a public holiday or optional vacation is a matter of government decision."

It also stated that because the country has "too many public holidays," "the time has come to eliminate rather than grow them."

The court made these remarks while dismissing a petition asking the Administrator of Dadra and Nagar Haveli to establish August 2 as a public holiday to commemorate the Union territory's liberation.&nbsp;

On Wednesday, a division bench of Justice Gautam S. Patel and Madhav J Jamdar heard the plea of Kishnabhai Nathubhai Ghutia, who sought an order directing the respondent authorities to issue a notification declaring August 2 as a public holiday from this year, pending the hearing and final disposition of his writ petition.&nbsp; 
 
Watch | Gravitas: Does India have too many public holidays?

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-does-india-have-too-many-public-holidays-443037/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

The court heard from Advocates Bhavesh Parmar, Devmani Shukla, Rajesh Sahani, and Reshma Nair, appearing for the petitioner, that the Union territories of Dadra and Nagar Haveli acquired "Liberation/Independence" from Portuguese authorities on August 2, 1954, and became part of India's territory.

From 1954 to 2020, the 2nd of August was permitted as a public holiday on account of liberation or independence. This was discontinued on July 29th, 2021, "the petitioner claimed."

It was also stated that if August 15 can be designated a public holiday to commemorate the country's Independence Day, there is no reason why August 2 cannot be declared a public holiday in Dadra and Nagar Haveli.

(With inputs from agencies)

"There is no legally enforceable fundamental right to a public holiday," the Bombay High Court recently said, "and whether or not to declare a particular day as a public holiday or optional vacation is a matter of government decision.

"There is no legally enforceable fundamental right to a public holiday," the Bombay High Court recently said, "and whether or not to declare a particular day as a public holiday or optional vacation is a matter of government decision." It also stated that because the country has "too many public holidays," "the time has come to eliminate rather than grow them." The court made these remarks while dismissing a petition asking the Administrator of Dadra and Nagar Haveli to establish August 2 as a public holiday to commemorate the Union territory's liberation. On Wednesday, a division bench of Justice Gautam S. Patel and Madhav J Jamdar heard the plea of Kishnabhai Nathubhai Ghutia, who sought an order directing the respondent authorities to issue a notification declaring August 2 as a public holiday from this year, pending the hearing and final disposition of his writ petition. Watch | Gravitas: Does India have too many public holidays? The court heard from Advocates Bhavesh Parmar, Devmani Shukla, Rajesh Sahani, and Reshma Nair, appearing for the petitioner, that the Union territories of Dadra and Nagar Haveli acquired "Liberation/Independence" from Portuguese authorities on August 2, 1954, and became part of India's territory. From 1954 to 2020, the 2nd of August was permitted as a public holiday on account of liberation or independence. This was discontinued on July 29th, 2021, "the petitioner claimed." It was also stated that if August 15 can be designated a public holiday to commemorate the country's Independence Day, there is no reason why August 2 cannot be declared a public holiday in Dadra and Nagar Haveli. (With inputs from agencies)

Watch | 'Not fundamental right': Bombay high court says it's time to reduce public holidays

Regarding the Dish TV and Yes Bank issue, the Promoter Group Company of Dish TV has filed an application before India's Bombay High Court in the share transfer matter.

Regarding the Dish TV and Yes Bank issue, the Promoter Group Company of Dish TV has filed an application before India's Bombay High Court in the share transfer matter. The company urged the HC to not allow the transfer of shares till the completion of the hearing. In its application, the company has appealed to Bombay HC to stop any attempt to exercise control over Dish TV. The application has been filed by JSGG Infra Developers LLP which is the promoter company of Dish TV. Plea to stay share transfer till the hearing is ongoing. The company in its application has appealed that the share transfer of Dish TV must be stopped till the hearing is going on. Complaint filed against Yes Bank before SEBI Prior to the filing of this application, Dish TV has also lodged a complaint against Yes Bank before SEBI. The company has written a letter to SEBI and said that Yes Bank had not announced open offer which is a violation of acquisition rules. Dish TV has said that Yes Bank is trying to take control over the board of Dish TV by proposing to hold shareholder EGM to make changes in the Board. However, it has not given any open offer with regards to this, till now. Appeal seeking investigation against Yes Bank and IDBI trusteeship In the application filed before the Bombay HC, Ministry of Finance, Yes Bank and Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) have been made parties to the case. Apart from them, exchanges, Catalyst Trusteeship, and Dish TV have also been made parties. Dish TV has informed the exchanges about the High Court case An investigation has been sought against Catalyst Trusteeship and Yes Bank. Apart from this, an investigation has also been sought against IDBI Trusteeship. In its application, the promoter company has said an attempt is being made by Yes Bank to take control over Dish TV and must be stopped.

Dish TV promoter company files plea before Bombay HC to halt share transfer till hearing is going on

India's Supreme Court has set aside the Bombay High Court verdict that said 'skin-to-skin' contact is needed for sexual assault under POCSO. The lower court had acquitted a man accused of groping a minor because there was no 'skin-to-skin' contact. Palki Sharma has the details.

Gravitas: India's Supreme Court sets aside 'skin-to-skin' verdict

The Supreme Court of India has overturned a verdict by the Bombay High Court in a sexual assault case.

In a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the apex court has&nbsp;ruled that the most important ingredient in a rape case is sexual intent and not skin-to-skin contact with the child.

The purpose of the law cannot be to allow the offender to escape the meshes of the law, it added.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-china-to-hold-14th-round-of-talks-today-to-resolve-border-standoff-430216" hreflang="en">India, China to hold 14th round of talks today to resolve border standoff</a>

A bench headed by Justice U U Lalit said, ''We have held that when the legislature has expressed clear intention, the courts cannot create ambiguity in the provision. It is right that courts cannot be overzealous in creating ambiguity.''

''Such a narrow interpretation adopted by the high court in the impugned order would have had a cascading effect on the safety of women and children,'' it added.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistan-parliament-passes-bill-for-chemical-castration-of-habitual-rapists-430233" hreflang="en">Pakistan parliament passes bill for chemical castration of habitual rapists&nbsp;</a>

In response, the National Commission for Women (NCW) said in a statement, "The Commission welcomes the Hon'ble Supreme Court's verdict today and believes that the apex court's decision in the matter will uphold the legal and constitutional safeguard for women and children."&nbsp;

The High Court had acquitted a 39-year-old man under the POCSO Act after he had been found guilty of sexual sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl and sentenced him to three years of imprisonment.

He was charged with the offence of outraging a woman's modesty under IPC section 354. 
&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

The Supreme Court of India has overturned a verdict by the Bombay High Court in a sexual assault case. In a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the apex court has ruled that the most important ingredient in a rape case is sexual intent and not skin-to-skin contact with the child.

The Supreme Court of India has overturned a verdict by the Bombay High Court in a sexual assault case. In a case under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the apex court has ruled that the most important ingredient in a rape case is sexual intent and not skin-to-skin contact with the child. The purpose of the law cannot be to allow the offender to escape the meshes of the law, it added. Also read | India, China to hold 14th round of talks today to resolve border standoff A bench headed by Justice U U Lalit said, ''We have held that when the legislature has expressed clear intention, the courts cannot create ambiguity in the provision. It is right that courts cannot be overzealous in creating ambiguity.'' ''Such a narrow interpretation adopted by the high court in the impugned order would have had a cascading effect on the safety of women and children,'' it added. Also read | Pakistan parliament passes bill for chemical castration of habitual rapists In response, the National Commission for Women (NCW) said in a statement, "The Commission welcomes the Hon'ble Supreme Court's verdict today and believes that the apex court's decision in the matter will uphold the legal and constitutional safeguard for women and children." The High Court had acquitted a 39-year-old man under the POCSO Act after he had been found guilty of sexual sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl and sentenced him to three years of imprisonment. He was charged with the offence of outraging a woman's modesty under IPC section 354. (With inputs from agencies)

India's SC sets aside lower court's ruling that skin-to-skin contact is essential for sexual offence case

Aryan Khan's bail plea will be heard again by the Bombay High Court on Thursday. Aryan is Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan's son and has been arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) in the drugs seizure case earlier this month.&nbsp;

During arguments on Tuesday, former Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi argued that Aryan Khan was a "young man" who should be sent to rehab rather than jail.

The 23-year-old star son was arrested on October 3 after a drugs raid on a cruise ship party by Narcotics Control Bureau officers in disguise.

At present, Aryan is lodged at the Arthur Road Jail along with another accused Arbaaz Merchant. Whereas, Munmun Dhamecha is at Byculla women prison. The hearing will resume on Thursday afternoon.

Rohatgi, who appeared for Aryan Khan, told the court on Tuesday that his client was invited to the cruise as a special guest.

He told the court that there was "no case of possession of drugs" against Aryan Khan and that he was arrested wrongly. He also said, "it was a fit case for bail".

Rohatgi said the law provides a maximum of one year of imprisonment for small quantities of drugs.

"Law provides that for small quantities, the maximum punishment is one year of imprisonment. For consumption, there is rehabilitation as per law," Rohatgi argued on behalf of Aryan Khan.

"Aryan Khan was invited by one Pratik Gaba. He was like an organiser. He invited accused 1 Aryan and accused 2 Arbaz Merchant. Both were invited by the same person. They both landed up together at the cruise terminal," Rohtagi said.

"It appears that NCB had some prior information that people on this cruise were having drugs so they were present in a certain strength. My client, Arbaz and many others were apprehended. A search was conducted and nothing was recovered from the accused 1 (Aryan Khan). No medical at any point was conducted to ascertain if he has taken any drug," he added.

Rohatgi said six grams of charas was recovered from accused number 2 (Arbaz Merchant) and Aryan had no relation with him except for arriving with him there."There was no recovery. There was no proof of consumption," he said."Many others were found with some amount of drugs so they allege that there was a general conspiracy. They are not charging me with consumption or possession but with conspiracy and conspiracy not with Arbaz but others," the former AG argued on behalf of Aryan Khan in the courtroom arguing before Justice Nitin Sambre.

Aryan Khan was arrested on October 3. An NCB team busted an alleged drugs party on the Cordelia Cruise ship which was on its way to Goa at mid-sea on October 2. A total of 20 people, including two Nigerian nationals, have been arrested so far in the case.

Aryan Khan`s bail plea was rejected by the special court on October 20 in the case following which his judicial custody in the matter got extended till October 30. Khan approached the Bombay High Court for an urgent bail hearing.(ANI)

Aryan Khan's bail plea will be heard again by the Bombay High Court on Thursday. Aryan is Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan's son and has been arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) in the drugs seizure case earlier this month.

Aryan Khan's bail plea will be heard again by the Bombay High Court on Thursday. Aryan is Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan's son and has been arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) in the drugs seizure case earlier this month. During arguments on Tuesday, former Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi argued that Aryan Khan was a "young man" who should be sent to rehab rather than jail. The 23-year-old star son was arrested on October 3 after a drugs raid on a cruise ship party by Narcotics Control Bureau officers in disguise. At present, Aryan is lodged at the Arthur Road Jail along with another accused Arbaaz Merchant. Whereas, Munmun Dhamecha is at Byculla women prison. The hearing will resume on Thursday afternoon. Rohatgi, who appeared for Aryan Khan, told the court on Tuesday that his client was invited to the cruise as a special guest. He told the court that there was "no case of possession of drugs" against Aryan Khan and that he was arrested wrongly. He also said, "it was a fit case for bail". Rohatgi said the law provides a maximum of one year of imprisonment for small quantities of drugs. "Law provides that for small quantities, the maximum punishment is one year of imprisonment. For consumption, there is rehabilitation as per law," Rohatgi argued on behalf of Aryan Khan. "Aryan Khan was invited by one Pratik Gaba. He was like an organiser. He invited accused 1 Aryan and accused 2 Arbaz Merchant. Both were invited by the same person. They both landed up together at the cruise terminal," Rohtagi said. "It appears that NCB had some prior information that people on this cruise were having drugs so they were present in a certain strength. My client, Arbaz and many others were apprehended. A search was conducted and nothing was recovered from the accused 1 (Aryan Khan). No medical at any point was conducted to ascertain if he has taken any drug," he added. Rohatgi said six grams of charas was recovered from accused number 2 (Arbaz Merchant) and Aryan had no relation with him except for arriving with him there."There was no recovery. There was no proof of consumption," he said."Many others were found with some amount of drugs so they allege that there was a general conspiracy. They are not charging me with consumption or possession but with conspiracy and conspiracy not with Arbaz but others," the former AG argued on behalf of Aryan Khan in the courtroom arguing before Justice Nitin Sambre. Aryan Khan was arrested on October 3. An NCB team busted an alleged drugs party on the Cordelia Cruise ship which was on its way to Goa at mid-sea on October 2. A total of 20 people, including two Nigerian nationals, have been arrested so far in the case. Aryan Khan`s bail plea was rejected by the special court on October 20 in the case following which his judicial custody in the matter got extended till October 30. Khan approached the Bombay High Court for an urgent bail hearing.(ANI)

Aryan Khan's bail plea hearing to continue today in Bombay HC

The Bombay High Court did not grant bail to Aryan Khan, one of the 20 arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau in relation to a drugs seizure case. Khan and others were arrested by NCB during a raid of a party on a cruise off the coast of Mumbai.&nbsp; 
 
Aryan is Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan's son and has been in judicial custody since October 3. The sessions court had earlier rejected his bail application and Aryan along with co-accussed Arbaaz Merchant and Munmun Dhamecha were shifted to Arthur Road jail in Mumbai last week.&nbsp; 
 
Former Attorney General of India Mukul Rohatgi who appeared for Aryan Khan's bail plea at Bombay High Court on Tuesday, said that Aryan Khan was invited to cruise as a special guest. 
 
"He (Aryan Khan) was invited to the cruise as a special guest. He was invited by Pratik Gaba who was like an organiser. He invited accused 1 Aryan and accused 2 Arbaz Merchant. Both were invited by the same person. They both landed up together at the cruise terminal," Rohatgi said in the courtroom. 
 
<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/aryan-khan-case-hrithik-roshan-to-pooja-bhatt-celebrities-extend-support-to-shah-rukh-khan-family-419215">Aryan Khan case: Hrithik Roshan to Pooja Bhatt, celebrities extend support to Shah Rukh Khan &amp; family</a> 
Rohatgi further attributed NCB`s presence at the cruise to some prior information. "It appears that NCB had some prior information that people on this cruise were having drugs so they were present in a certain strength," he stated.He that nothing was recovered from Aryan Khan when searches were conducted.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions-blogs/opinion-aryan-khan-and-the-price-of-stardom-418798">Opinion| Aryan Khan and the price of stardom</a> 
 
"My client, Arbaz and many others were apprehended. A search was conducted and nothing was recovered from Accused 1 (Aryan Khan). No medical at any point was conducted to ascertain if he has taken any drug," he added. 
Talking about the recovery of six grams of charas from Arbaz Merchant, Rohatgi said that Aryan Khan has no relation with him except for arriving with him there and there was no recovery of drugs from Aryan and no proof of consumption was reported.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/salman-khan-visits-shah-rukh-khan-at-mannat-after-aryan-khans-arrest-in-drugs-case-418096">Salman Khan visits Shah Rukh Khan at Mannat after Aryan Khan's arrest in drugs case</a> 
 
Last week, a<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/bollywood/news-aryan-khans-bail-rejected-by-court-to-remain-in-arthur-road-jail-422300">&nbsp;special court in Mumbai&nbsp;refused to grant bail</a> to Aryan and two others in connection with the seizure of drugs. Following this, Aryan Khan moved a bail application in the Bombay High Court against the NDPS court order on his bail rejection. 
 
&nbsp;A total of 20 people, including two Nigerian nationals, have been arrested so far in the case.

The Bombay High Court did not grant bail to Aryan Khan, one of the 20 arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau in relation to a drugs seizure case. Khan and others were arrested by NCB during a raid of a party on a cruise off the coast of Mumbai.

The Bombay High Court did not grant bail to Aryan Khan, one of the 20 arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau in relation to a drugs seizure case. Khan and others were arrested by NCB during a raid of a party on a cruise off the coast of Mumbai. Aryan is Bollywood superstar Shah Rukh Khan's son and has been in judicial custody since October 3. The sessions court had earlier rejected his bail application and Aryan along with co-accussed Arbaaz Merchant and Munmun Dhamecha were shifted to Arthur Road jail in Mumbai last week. Former Attorney General of India Mukul Rohatgi who appeared for Aryan Khan's bail plea at Bombay High Court on Tuesday, said that Aryan Khan was invited to cruise as a special guest. "He (Aryan Khan) was invited to the cruise as a special guest. He was invited by Pratik Gaba who was like an organiser. He invited accused 1 Aryan and accused 2 Arbaz Merchant. Both were invited by the same person. They both landed up together at the cruise terminal," Rohatgi said in the courtroom. Aryan Khan case: Hrithik Roshan to Pooja Bhatt, celebrities extend support to Shah Rukh Khan & family Rohatgi further attributed NCB`s presence at the cruise to some prior information. "It appears that NCB had some prior information that people on this cruise were having drugs so they were present in a certain strength," he stated.He that nothing was recovered from Aryan Khan when searches were conducted. Opinion| Aryan Khan and the price of stardom "My client, Arbaz and many others were apprehended. A search was conducted and nothing was recovered from Accused 1 (Aryan Khan). No medical at any point was conducted to ascertain if he has taken any drug," he added. Talking about the recovery of six grams of charas from Arbaz Merchant, Rohatgi said that Aryan Khan has no relation with him except for arriving with him there and there was no recovery of drugs from Aryan and no proof of consumption was reported. Salman Khan visits Shah Rukh Khan at Mannat after Aryan Khan's arrest in drugs case Last week, a special court in Mumbai refused to grant bail to Aryan and two others in connection with the seizure of drugs. Following this, Aryan Khan moved a bail application in the Bombay High Court against the NDPS court order on his bail rejection. A total of 20 people, including two Nigerian nationals, have been arrested so far in the case.

No bail for Aryan Khan in drugs seizure case yet, court to resume hearing on Wednesday

The Bombay High Court on Thursday asked Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd (ZEEL) to call an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) as requisitioned by shareholders Invesco Developing Market Funds and OFI Global China Fund. However, the court said the EGM resolution has to be kept in abeyance till it decides on the legality and validity of the EGM requisition. 
 
Retired judge to chair EGM

The EGM will be chaired by a retired judge. The court added that the resolution would be subject to approval by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.

The counsel appearing for Zee Entertainment said the company will inform them about the date of the EGM by Friday as they will never go against the law and the orders of the honourable court.

Media reports claiming Invesco’s victory ‘false, biased’

Several media reports claimed that the court agreed and announced the decision in favour of Invesco. The reports announcing this as a victory for Invesco as ZEEL has agreed to their demands are fake and biased towards one party.

Invesco had tried to force ZEEL into a deal with Reliance group.

Invesco seeks appointment of 6 new directors

Invesco had called for the EGM to push for the ouster of directors Ashok Kurien and Manish Chokhani, apart from MD and CEO. However, Kurien and Chokhani have already resigned from their posts, thereby, making the resolution moved by Invesco "infructuous".

Invesco sought the appointment of six new directors – Surendra Singh Sirohi, Naina Krishna Murthy, Rohan Dhamija, Aruna Sharma, Srinivasa Rao Addepalli, and Gaurav Mehta.

The Bombay High Court on Thursday asked Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd (ZEEL) to call an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) as requisitioned by shareholders Invesco Developing Market Funds and OFI Global China Fund.

The Bombay High Court on Thursday asked Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd (ZEEL) to call an extraordinary general meeting (EGM) as requisitioned by shareholders Invesco Developing Market Funds and OFI Global China Fund. However, the court said the EGM resolution has to be kept in abeyance till it decides on the legality and validity of the EGM requisition. Retired judge to chair EGM The EGM will be chaired by a retired judge. The court added that the resolution would be subject to approval by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. The counsel appearing for Zee Entertainment said the company will inform them about the date of the EGM by Friday as they will never go against the law and the orders of the honourable court. Media reports claiming Invesco’s victory ‘false, biased’ Several media reports claimed that the court agreed and announced the decision in favour of Invesco. The reports announcing this as a victory for Invesco as ZEEL has agreed to their demands are fake and biased towards one party. Invesco had tried to force ZEEL into a deal with Reliance group. Invesco seeks appointment of 6 new directors Invesco had called for the EGM to push for the ouster of directors Ashok Kurien and Manish Chokhani, apart from MD and CEO. However, Kurien and Chokhani have already resigned from their posts, thereby, making the resolution moved by Invesco "infructuous". Invesco sought the appointment of six new directors – Surendra Singh Sirohi, Naina Krishna Murthy, Rohan Dhamija, Aruna Sharma, Srinivasa Rao Addepalli, and Gaurav Mehta.

ZEEL-Invesco Case: Bombay High Court to decide on EGM today. Details here

The Bombay High Court on Thursday dismissed Bollywood star Kangana Ranaut's appeal seeking to quash a criminal defamation proceeding that was filed against her by lyricist Javed Akhtar last year.&nbsp;

In her verdict, Justice Revati Mohite-Dere upheld the discretionary orders of the Andheri Court Magistrate directing the police to probe into the allegations levelled by Akhtar against Ranaut, both stalwarts in the Indian film industry. 
 
Akhtar had slapped a defamation case against Ranaut and accused her of making defamatory statements against him on national and international television. Akhtar stated that it was a "clear campaign to tarnish and malign" him in the eyes of the people. 
 
The veteran writer alleged that Ranaut dragged his name in actor Sushant Singh Rajput`s death case. 
 
In March this year, the Magistrate issued a bailable warrant against Ranaut who appeared before the court and was granted bail, and in July she moved the high court challenging the proceedings initiated by the lower court. 
 
Ranaut is busy promoting her new film 'Thalaivi' - a biopic on former AIADMK chief and CM of Tamil Nadu, late J Jayalalitha. The film is scheduled to hit theatres on Friday.&nbsp;

The Bombay High Court on Thursday dismissed Bollywood star Kangana Ranaut's appeal seeking to quash a criminal defamation proceeding that was filed against her by lyricist Javed Akhtar last year.

The Bombay High Court on Thursday dismissed Bollywood star Kangana Ranaut's appeal seeking to quash a criminal defamation proceeding that was filed against her by lyricist Javed Akhtar last year. In her verdict, Justice Revati Mohite-Dere upheld the discretionary orders of the Andheri Court Magistrate directing the police to probe into the allegations levelled by Akhtar against Ranaut, both stalwarts in the Indian film industry. Akhtar had slapped a defamation case against Ranaut and accused her of making defamatory statements against him on national and international television. Akhtar stated that it was a "clear campaign to tarnish and malign" him in the eyes of the people. The veteran writer alleged that Ranaut dragged his name in actor Sushant Singh Rajput`s death case. In March this year, the Magistrate issued a bailable warrant against Ranaut who appeared before the court and was granted bail, and in July she moved the high court challenging the proceedings initiated by the lower court. Ranaut is busy promoting her new film 'Thalaivi' - a biopic on former AIADMK chief and CM of Tamil Nadu, late J Jayalalitha. The film is scheduled to hit theatres on Friday.

Bombay HC quashes Kangana Ranaut's plea against defamation case filed by Javed Akhtar

The Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court has ruled that throwing a chit at a married woman for professing love amounts to outraging her modesty.

The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has given a strict order while hearing a case related to a married woman. The court said that throwing love chit on a married woman is an insult to her dignity.

The trial court also slapped&nbsp;₹&nbsp;90,000 fine on accused Shrikrushna Tawari, of which&nbsp;₹&nbsp;85,000 is to be paid to the survivor as compensation.

While upholding the conviction, the High Court added that the modesty of a woman is her "most precious jewel" and there cannot be a "straitjacket formula to ascertain whether it's outraged".

"The complainant is a married woman, aged 45 years and the very act of throwing a chit on her person which professes love for her and which contains poetic verses, albeit extremely, purely written is sufficient to outrage the modesty of a woman," the court said.

The judge said that he had no reason to disbelieve the evidence of the complainant that the applicant threw a chit on her person containing objectionable material.

"No-fault can be found with the concurrent finding that the applicant did outrage her modesty. The evidence of Mrs "S" that the applicant used to flirt, make gestures like pouting of lips, on occasions used to hit her with small pebbles is confidence-inspiring and in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction, I would be loathe to disagree with the concurrent findings of Courts below based on the appreciation of evidence on record," the court added.

The incident happened on October 3, 2011, when the petitioner, owner of a neighbouring grocery shop, approached her when she was washing utensils and tried to hand over a chit. After she refused to accept it, he threw it at her and left muttering "I love you". The next day, he made obscene gestures and warned her not to disclose the chit contents.

On the basis of the report, Civil Lines Police Station, Akola registered offences punishable under Sections 354, 506 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The sessions court convicted him under Sections 354, 509 and 506 of IPC and sentenced him to two years of rigorous imprisonment on June 21, 2018, and also slapped a&nbsp;₹&nbsp;40,000 fine, of which&nbsp;₹&nbsp;35,000 was to be paid to the woman as compensation.

Tawari challenged the verdict by filing a criminal revision application contending that the survivor had lodged a false complaint as she purchased groceries on credit from his shop and was not inclined to pay the amount.

While striking down his conviction under Section 506, the court observed that he deserved a chance to reform and further incarceration is not likely to be of any avail.

"I have noted that the applicant has already undergone 45 days of incarceration and considering the date of the incident or commission of the offence, as the provisions of the law stood then, there was no minimum sentence provided for an offence punishable under Section 354 of the IPC. It is only by the 2013 amendment that a minimum sentence is provided. I, therefore, find it appropriate to modify the sentence of imprisonment imposed for offences punishable under Section 354 and 509 of the IPC to the period already undergone," the court added.

The judge, however, enhanced the fine amount to&nbsp;₹&nbsp;90,000 and told the petitioner to deposit it in the trial court within 15 days and shall file in the registry an affidavit of compliance.

"The trial Magistrate shall ensure that the victim/informant is made aware of this judgment and that the enhanced fine is duly paid to her, and if, due to death or any other reason, the victim/ first informant is not available, to her legal heirs," the court further added.

The Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court has ruled that throwing a chit at a married woman for professing love amounts to outraging her modesty. The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has given a strict order while hearing a case related to a married woman.

The Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court has ruled that throwing a chit at a married woman for professing love amounts to outraging her modesty. The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court has given a strict order while hearing a case related to a married woman. The court said that throwing love chit on a married woman is an insult to her dignity. The trial court also slapped ₹ 90,000 fine on accused Shrikrushna Tawari, of which ₹ 85,000 is to be paid to the survivor as compensation. While upholding the conviction, the High Court added that the modesty of a woman is her "most precious jewel" and there cannot be a "straitjacket formula to ascertain whether it's outraged". "The complainant is a married woman, aged 45 years and the very act of throwing a chit on her person which professes love for her and which contains poetic verses, albeit extremely, purely written is sufficient to outrage the modesty of a woman," the court said. The judge said that he had no reason to disbelieve the evidence of the complainant that the applicant threw a chit on her person containing objectionable material. "No-fault can be found with the concurrent finding that the applicant did outrage her modesty. The evidence of Mrs "S" that the applicant used to flirt, make gestures like pouting of lips, on occasions used to hit her with small pebbles is confidence-inspiring and in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction, I would be loathe to disagree with the concurrent findings of Courts below based on the appreciation of evidence on record," the court added. The incident happened on October 3, 2011, when the petitioner, owner of a neighbouring grocery shop, approached her when she was washing utensils and tried to hand over a chit. After she refused to accept it, he threw it at her and left muttering "I love you". The next day, he made obscene gestures and warned her not to disclose the chit contents. On the basis of the report, Civil Lines Police Station, Akola registered offences punishable under Sections 354, 506 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The sessions court convicted him under Sections 354, 509 and 506 of IPC and sentenced him to two years of rigorous imprisonment on June 21, 2018, and also slapped a ₹ 40,000 fine, of which ₹ 35,000 was to be paid to the woman as compensation. Tawari challenged the verdict by filing a criminal revision application contending that the survivor had lodged a false complaint as she purchased groceries on credit from his shop and was not inclined to pay the amount. While striking down his conviction under Section 506, the court observed that he deserved a chance to reform and further incarceration is not likely to be of any avail. "I have noted that the applicant has already undergone 45 days of incarceration and considering the date of the incident or commission of the offence, as the provisions of the law stood then, there was no minimum sentence provided for an offence punishable under Section 354 of the IPC. It is only by the 2013 amendment that a minimum sentence is provided. I, therefore, find it appropriate to modify the sentence of imprisonment imposed for offences punishable under Section 354 and 509 of the IPC to the period already undergone," the court added. The judge, however, enhanced the fine amount to ₹ 90,000 and told the petitioner to deposit it in the trial court within 15 days and shall file in the registry an affidavit of compliance. "The trial Magistrate shall ensure that the victim/informant is made aware of this judgment and that the enhanced fine is duly paid to her, and if, due to death or any other reason, the victim/ first informant is not available, to her legal heirs," the court further added.

Indian court rules that throwing love chit at married woman amounts to outraging modesty

The Bombay High Court on Friday noted that passing a blanket gag order on the media against reporting anything against Bollywood actor Shilpa Shetty, wife of <a href="http://13.235.153.162/entertainment/bollywood/news-raj-kundra-pornography-case-shilpa-shetty-not-given-clean-chit-yet-by-crime-branch-401025">arrested businessman Raj Kundra</a>, shall have a "chilling effect on the freedom of press" and said there is a judicial limit on what can be construed as good or bad journalism. 
 
Justice Gautam Patel, however, directed that three videos uploaded on YouTube channels of three private persons be deleted and not uploaded again as they were "malicious and with not even a slightest attempt to investigate into the truth of the matter". The court noted that the freedom of press has to be balanced with the right to privacy of an individual. The three videos made comments on Shetty's moral standing and went on to question the quality of her parenting following the arrest of her husband Raj Kundra in a case related to the alleged production and streaming of pornographic content on apps. The court was hearing a suit filed by Shetty against alleged defamatory articles published against her and their family after the arrest of her husband on July 19. 
 
Kundra (45) is currently in jail under judicial custody. Shetty, in an interim application, had sought for media to be restrained from publishing any "incorrect, false, malicious and defamatory" content. Justice Patel, however, noted that the plaintiff's prayer seeking media to be restrained will have a "chilling effect on the freedom of press". "There is a judicial limit on what is good or bad journalism as this comes very close to freedom of press," the court said. The court noted that the articles referred to by Shetty in her suit do not seem to be defamatory. "It cannot be like if you (media) are not going to write or say anything nice about me (Shetty) then do not say anything at all. How can this be?" Justice Patel said. 
 
The court noted that most of the articles referred to in the suit, including one that claimed that "Shetty cried and fought with her husband Kundra" when he was brought to their house by the police for joint interrogation was based on what police sources said. "Reportage of something based on what police sources have said is not defamatory. If this had happened in the four walls of your house with no one around then the issue is different. But this has happened in the presence of outsiders. How is this defamation?" Justice Patel said. 
 
The court added that at the most this shows that the plaintiff (Shetty) is human and there is nothing wrong with it. "You chose a life in the public eye then all this will come as part of the territory. Your life is under a microscope," Justice Patel said. Shetty's counsel Birendra Saraf also took objection to an article published on a website, 'Peeping Moon', in which it was claimed that Shetty "destroyed evidence" in the case in which her husband has been arrested.&nbsp; 
 
Justice Patel, however, said he was not inclined to direct for this particular article to be taken down as the material in it was prima facie drawn from an understanding of what the police said or indicated. "No part of this order shall be construed as a gag on the media," Justice Patel observed.

 
The actor's application also sought damages of Rs 25 crore, stating that the respondents (several media publications and social media sites like Google, Facebook and YouTube) are causing irreparable loss and damage to her reputation.&nbsp; 
 
In her plea, Shetty sought directions against social media platforms like Google, YouTube and Facebook to remove all defamatory content related to her and family. To this, Justice Patel said, "Your prayer seeking for social media platforms like Google, YouTube and Facebook to exercise control over editorial content is dangerous." 
&nbsp;The HC directed all defendants in the suit to file their affidavits and posted the matter for further hearing on September 20.

The Bombay High Court on Friday noted that passing a blanket gag order on the media against reporting anything against Bollywood actor Shilpa Shetty, wife of arrested businessman Raj Kundra, shall have a "chilling effect on the freedom of press" and said there is a judicial limit on what can be construed as good or bad journalism.

The Bombay High Court on Friday noted that passing a blanket gag order on the media against reporting anything against Bollywood actor Shilpa Shetty, wife of arrested businessman Raj Kundra, shall have a "chilling effect on the freedom of press" and said there is a judicial limit on what can be construed as good or bad journalism. Justice Gautam Patel, however, directed that three videos uploaded on YouTube channels of three private persons be deleted and not uploaded again as they were "malicious and with not even a slightest attempt to investigate into the truth of the matter". The court noted that the freedom of press has to be balanced with the right to privacy of an individual. The three videos made comments on Shetty's moral standing and went on to question the quality of her parenting following the arrest of her husband Raj Kundra in a case related to the alleged production and streaming of pornographic content on apps. The court was hearing a suit filed by Shetty against alleged defamatory articles published against her and their family after the arrest of her husband on July 19. Kundra (45) is currently in jail under judicial custody. Shetty, in an interim application, had sought for media to be restrained from publishing any "incorrect, false, malicious and defamatory" content. Justice Patel, however, noted that the plaintiff's prayer seeking media to be restrained will have a "chilling effect on the freedom of press". "There is a judicial limit on what is good or bad journalism as this comes very close to freedom of press," the court said. The court noted that the articles referred to by Shetty in her suit do not seem to be defamatory. "It cannot be like if you (media) are not going to write or say anything nice about me (Shetty) then do not say anything at all. How can this be?" Justice Patel said. The court noted that most of the articles referred to in the suit, including one that claimed that "Shetty cried and fought with her husband Kundra" when he was brought to their house by the police for joint interrogation was based on what police sources said. "Reportage of something based on what police sources have said is not defamatory. If this had happened in the four walls of your house with no one around then the issue is different. But this has happened in the presence of outsiders. How is this defamation?" Justice Patel said. The court added that at the most this shows that the plaintiff (Shetty) is human and there is nothing wrong with it. "You chose a life in the public eye then all this will come as part of the territory. Your life is under a microscope," Justice Patel said. Shetty's counsel Birendra Saraf also took objection to an article published on a website, 'Peeping Moon', in which it was claimed that Shetty "destroyed evidence" in the case in which her husband has been arrested. Justice Patel, however, said he was not inclined to direct for this particular article to be taken down as the material in it was prima facie drawn from an understanding of what the police said or indicated. "No part of this order shall be construed as a gag on the media," Justice Patel observed. The actor's application also sought damages of Rs 25 crore, stating that the respondents (several media publications and social media sites like Google, Facebook and YouTube) are causing irreparable loss and damage to her reputation. In her plea, Shetty sought directions against social media platforms like Google, YouTube and Facebook to remove all defamatory content related to her and family. To this, Justice Patel said, "Your prayer seeking for social media platforms like Google, YouTube and Facebook to exercise control over editorial content is dangerous." The HC directed all defendants in the suit to file their affidavits and posted the matter for further hearing on September 20.

Blanket gag order will have a chilling effect on press freedom: HC on Shilpa Shetty's plea

The Regional Passport Office (RPO) here told the Bombay High Court on Monday it will "expeditiously" decide on renewing Kangana Ranaut's passport once the actor made requisite corrections in her application for the key travel document. 
 
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Anil Singh, who appeared for the RPO, told a bench of Justices SS Shinde and Revati Mohite-Dere that the application that Ranaut had submitted with the passport office in Mumbai, had factual inconsistencies. He said that for instance, her application said that she had criminal cases pending against her. 
 
However, only an FIR had been registered against her and criminal proceedings in the said case were yet to begin, Singh said. Singh told the HC that if Ranaut's counsel, advocate Rizwan Siddiquee, clarified the same before the court, and if the actor made the necessary corrections in her application, the passport office would consider her plea and take an expeditious decision as per procedure. The bench accepted Singh's statement. 
 
"The learned ASG on instructions submits that application does not mention the correct facts, inasmuch as, it is stated in the said application that criminal cases are pending against the petitioner (Ranaut), when in fact only FIRs are registered against the petitioner," the HC observed. 
 
"He (Singh) submits that in case the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is ready to make a statement that no criminal case is pending against the petitioner and make appropriate corrections in the pending application before the Respondent Passport Authority, the said Authority is ready to consider the application for renewal of passport, in accordance with the Passport Act/rules/ procedure, expeditiously," the HC said in its order.&nbsp; 
 
Advocate Siddiquee then clarified that no criminal proceedings were pending against Ranaut. He also agreed to make the necessary corrections in Ranaut's application.&nbsp; 
 
Ranaut had filed an interim application in the HC earlier this month, saying she needed to travel to Budapest (Hungary) this month for the shooting of her upcoming film 'Dhakkad' and thus, needed her passport renewed.&nbsp; 
 
The actor said in her plea that the renewal had been denied by the passport office on the ground that she and her sister Rangoli Chandel had an FIR registered against them by the suburban Bandra police last year on charges of sedition and for alleged hateful tweets.&nbsp; 
 
She said in her plea that the RPO had raised an objection to renew or reissue her passport because of the said FIR. On the previous hearing last week, advocate Siddiquee had said the shooting of the film had been scheduled already and the its producers were losing money due to the delay in the shoot because of the actor's inability to travel to Budapest.&nbsp; 
 
On Monday, the bench of Justices Shinde and Mohite-Dere accepted the statements made by ASG Singh and advocate Siddiquee, and accordingly disposed of Ranaut's interim application.&nbsp; 
 
"In the light of statement made by Mr Siddiquee, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr Anil Singh, learned ASG, submits that the application filed by the petitioner for renewal of passport will be decided as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with relevant provisions of the Passport Act/rules/procedures," the bench said.&nbsp;

The Regional Passport Office (RPO) here told the Bombay High Court on Monday it will "expeditiously" decide on renewing Kangana Ranaut's passport once the actor made requisite corrections in her application for the key travel document.

The Regional Passport Office (RPO) here told the Bombay High Court on Monday it will "expeditiously" decide on renewing Kangana Ranaut's passport once the actor made requisite corrections in her application for the key travel document. Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Anil Singh, who appeared for the RPO, told a bench of Justices SS Shinde and Revati Mohite-Dere that the application that Ranaut had submitted with the passport office in Mumbai, had factual inconsistencies. He said that for instance, her application said that she had criminal cases pending against her. However, only an FIR had been registered against her and criminal proceedings in the said case were yet to begin, Singh said. Singh told the HC that if Ranaut's counsel, advocate Rizwan Siddiquee, clarified the same before the court, and if the actor made the necessary corrections in her application, the passport office would consider her plea and take an expeditious decision as per procedure. The bench accepted Singh's statement. "The learned ASG on instructions submits that application does not mention the correct facts, inasmuch as, it is stated in the said application that criminal cases are pending against the petitioner (Ranaut), when in fact only FIRs are registered against the petitioner," the HC observed. "He (Singh) submits that in case the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is ready to make a statement that no criminal case is pending against the petitioner and make appropriate corrections in the pending application before the Respondent Passport Authority, the said Authority is ready to consider the application for renewal of passport, in accordance with the Passport Act/rules/ procedure, expeditiously," the HC said in its order. Advocate Siddiquee then clarified that no criminal proceedings were pending against Ranaut. He also agreed to make the necessary corrections in Ranaut's application. Ranaut had filed an interim application in the HC earlier this month, saying she needed to travel to Budapest (Hungary) this month for the shooting of her upcoming film 'Dhakkad' and thus, needed her passport renewed. The actor said in her plea that the renewal had been denied by the passport office on the ground that she and her sister Rangoli Chandel had an FIR registered against them by the suburban Bandra police last year on charges of sedition and for alleged hateful tweets. She said in her plea that the RPO had raised an objection to renew or reissue her passport because of the said FIR. On the previous hearing last week, advocate Siddiquee had said the shooting of the film had been scheduled already and the its producers were losing money due to the delay in the shoot because of the actor's inability to travel to Budapest. On Monday, the bench of Justices Shinde and Mohite-Dere accepted the statements made by ASG Singh and advocate Siddiquee, and accordingly disposed of Ranaut's interim application. "In the light of statement made by Mr Siddiquee, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr Anil Singh, learned ASG, submits that the application filed by the petitioner for renewal of passport will be decided as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with relevant provisions of the Passport Act/rules/procedures," the bench said.

Kangana Ranaut's passport renewal process to be expedited post-corrections: Bombay HC 

Rhea Chakraborty Granted Bail&nbsp; - Bollywood actress Rhea Chakraborty, who was arrested by Narcotics Control Bureau in September was granted bail by the Bombay High Court on Wednesday. 
 
Justice SV Kotwal, who had completed the hearing in her bail application last week and kept his ruling in reserve, pronounced the order on Wednesday morning. 
 
Rhea was arrested on September 9 by NCB in a drug related case which is part of the ongoing probe in the Sushant Singh Rajput death case. Rhea has spent 28 days in custody till date. 
 
She was sent to extended judicial custody by a Special NDPS Court till October 20 on Tuesday.

Welcoming the court order, Rhea's lawyer told the press, "Truth and justice have prevailed and ultimately the submissions on facts and law have been accepted by Justice Kotwal".

"The arrest and custody of Rhea was totally unwarranted and beyond the reach of law. The hounding and witch hunt by three Central agencies -- the CBI, ED and NCB -- of Rhea should come to an end. We remain committed to the truth. `Satya Meva Jayate`," said Maneshinde.

Sushant Singh Rajput death case&nbsp;-&nbsp;Rhea Chakraborty Granted Bail

Rhea, along with 19 others, including her brother Showik, were arrested during August-September by the NCB in connection with the drugs angle which surfaced during the investigations of Rajput`s death case.

Among those nabbed include the Chakraborty siblings, Sushant`s staffers Dipesh Sawant, Samuel Miranda, several drug peddlers, suppliers and persons linked with the film industry.

Some of the accused have been granted bail, others remain in custody for varying periods as the NCB probe continues along with questioning of several leading actresses like Deepika Padukone, Sara Ali Khan and Shraddha Kapoor.

So far, only Rhea has been granted bail. Her brother Showik continues to be in custody.

Also see:<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/sushant-singh-rajput-case-over-80k-fake-accounts-were-reportedly-created-to-defame-mumbai-police-332989" hreflang="en"> Sushant Singh Rajput case: Over 80k fake accounts were reportedly created to defame Mumbai Police</a>

Rhea Chakraborty Granted Bail - Bollywood actress Rhea Chakraborty, who was arrested by Narcotics Control Bureau in September was granted bail by the Bombay High Court on Wednesday.

Rhea Chakraborty Granted Bail - Bollywood actress Rhea Chakraborty, who was arrested by Narcotics Control Bureau in September was granted bail by the Bombay High Court on Wednesday. Justice SV Kotwal, who had completed the hearing in her bail application last week and kept his ruling in reserve, pronounced the order on Wednesday morning. Rhea was arrested on September 9 by NCB in a drug related case which is part of the ongoing probe in the Sushant Singh Rajput death case. Rhea has spent 28 days in custody till date. She was sent to extended judicial custody by a Special NDPS Court till October 20 on Tuesday. Welcoming the court order, Rhea's lawyer told the press, "Truth and justice have prevailed and ultimately the submissions on facts and law have been accepted by Justice Kotwal". "The arrest and custody of Rhea was totally unwarranted and beyond the reach of law. The hounding and witch hunt by three Central agencies -- the CBI, ED and NCB -- of Rhea should come to an end. We remain committed to the truth. `Satya Meva Jayate`," said Maneshinde. Sushant Singh Rajput death case - Rhea Chakraborty Granted Bail Rhea, along with 19 others, including her brother Showik, were arrested during August-September by the NCB in connection with the drugs angle which surfaced during the investigations of Rajput`s death case. Among those nabbed include the Chakraborty siblings, Sushant`s staffers Dipesh Sawant, Samuel Miranda, several drug peddlers, suppliers and persons linked with the film industry. Some of the accused have been granted bail, others remain in custody for varying periods as the NCB probe continues along with questioning of several leading actresses like Deepika Padukone, Sara Ali Khan and Shraddha Kapoor. So far, only Rhea has been granted bail. Her brother Showik continues to be in custody. Also see: Sushant Singh Rajput case: Over 80k fake accounts were reportedly created to defame Mumbai Police

Rhea Chakraborty granted bail by Bombay HC after 28 days of judicial custody

The Bombay High Court on Friday took suo motu cognizance of the Bhiwandi building collapse incident, in which at least 41 people lost their lives, and initiated a public interest litigation in the matter.

A division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice GS Kulkarni made the Maharashtra government, relevant municipal corporations and others respondent in the matter.

"Deeply pained and saddened by some of the recent incidents of the collapse of residential buildings resulting in the loss of lives, we desire to initiate this suo motu public interest litigation," the bench said.

The High Court observed that it was reported that the building was not included in the list of dangerous structures so notified by the Bhiwandi Nizampur Municipal Corporation.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/sc-asks-lawyers-association-seeking-interest-free-loans-to-file-affidavit-proving-credentials-329911">Also read:&nbsp;SC asks lawyers' association seeking interest free loans to file affidavit proving credentials</a>

"It is further reported that in the past three years, several notices were issued in respect of this building by the Municipal Corporation and the land owner/developer of the building, Sayyed Ahmed Jilani was called upon to get the building vacated due to its dilapidated condition.... If this is true, it is unfortunate that no action was taken by the Municipal Authorities to get the building vacated," the bench noted.

"It is also reported that this building was constructed sometime in the year 1984 before the Municipal Corporation was formed and later on, two illegal floors came to be constructed. However, no action was taken by any of the Municipal Authorities and its officers," it added.

Taking note of the collapse of the three-storeyed building in Raigad district last month, the bench said that this is not a solitary incident. Such incidents of building collapse are happening frequently, almost every year and more particularly during the monsoon months, it said.

The bench said that it has some questions in the matter, including whether the municipal bodies are completely helpless to prevent such collapses and prevent loss of lives, and/or if there is any machinery available with such municipal bodies to prevent such occurrences.

It said that another question in its mind is if there is a mechanism in place for the structural audit of the buildings?As many as 41 people lost their lives while 25 others were rescued from the debris of a three-storey building, which had collapsed at around 3:40 am on September 21 in Patel Compound of Maharashtra's Thane district.&nbsp;

The Bombay High Court on Friday took suo motu cognizance of the Bhiwandi building collapse incident, in which at least 41 people lost their lives, and initiated a public interest litigation in the matter.

The Bombay High Court on Friday took suo motu cognizance of the Bhiwandi building collapse incident, in which at least 41 people lost their lives, and initiated a public interest litigation in the matter. A division bench of Chief Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice GS Kulkarni made the Maharashtra government, relevant municipal corporations and others respondent in the matter. "Deeply pained and saddened by some of the recent incidents of the collapse of residential buildings resulting in the loss of lives, we desire to initiate this suo motu public interest litigation," the bench said. The High Court observed that it was reported that the building was not included in the list of dangerous structures so notified by the Bhiwandi Nizampur Municipal Corporation. Also read: SC asks lawyers' association seeking interest free loans to file affidavit proving credentials "It is further reported that in the past three years, several notices were issued in respect of this building by the Municipal Corporation and the land owner/developer of the building, Sayyed Ahmed Jilani was called upon to get the building vacated due to its dilapidated condition.... If this is true, it is unfortunate that no action was taken by the Municipal Authorities to get the building vacated," the bench noted. "It is also reported that this building was constructed sometime in the year 1984 before the Municipal Corporation was formed and later on, two illegal floors came to be constructed. However, no action was taken by any of the Municipal Authorities and its officers," it added. Taking note of the collapse of the three-storeyed building in Raigad district last month, the bench said that this is not a solitary incident. Such incidents of building collapse are happening frequently, almost every year and more particularly during the monsoon months, it said. The bench said that it has some questions in the matter, including whether the municipal bodies are completely helpless to prevent such collapses and prevent loss of lives, and/or if there is any machinery available with such municipal bodies to prevent such occurrences. It said that another question in its mind is if there is a mechanism in place for the structural audit of the buildings?As many as 41 people lost their lives while 25 others were rescued from the debris of a three-storey building, which had collapsed at around 3:40 am on September 21 in Patel Compound of Maharashtra's Thane district.

Bombay HC takes suo motu cognizance of Bhiwandi building collapse

63 moons technologies limited has approached the Bombay High Court seeking a direction to the CBI to expedite its inquiry into a complaint filed by the company against former Union finance minister P Chidambaram and two others alleging abuse of official powers, according to PTI.

The Jignesh Shah-promoted company, earlier known as Financial Technologies Ltd, in its petition filed on July 4 questioned `delayed' action by the Central Bureau of Investigation against the senior Congress leader and bureaucrats K P Krishnan and Ramesh Abhishek.

Abhishek was chairman of the Forward Markets Commission and Krishnan was an additional secretary and joint secretary in the Ministry of Finance when Chidambaram was Finance Minister.

On February 15, 2019, 63 moons filed a complaint with the CBI, seeking that a case be registered against the three for `abusing' their official positions and causing damage to the company when the multi-crore payment default scam at National Spot Exchange Limited (NSEL) came to light.

On June 20, 2019, the company filed a petition in the high court, seeking a direction to the CBI to register an FIR.

In August 2019, the CBI informed the court that after verification of the complaint, an inquiry will be initiated.

The petition said that in March 2020 it sent a letter to the CBI seeking to know the status of inquiry. The latter informed that its complaint has been forwarded to the Chief Vigilance Officer for approval by the competent authority.

"Four months have lapsed since then and there has been no further communication from the CBI. The CBI has failed to register an FIR," the petition said.

The company has accused Chidambaram and the other two of taking "malicious and malafide" action against it when the NSEL scam came to light in 2012-2013.

On July 10, a division bench of the high court posted the petition for hearing to July 17.

63 moons technologies limited has approached the Bombay High Court seeking a direction to the CBI to expedite its inquiry into a complaint filed by the company against former Union finance minister P Chidambaram and two others alleging abuse of official powers, according to PTI.

63 moons technologies limited has approached the Bombay High Court seeking a direction to the CBI to expedite its inquiry into a complaint filed by the company against former Union finance minister P Chidambaram and two others alleging abuse of official powers, according to PTI. The Jignesh Shah-promoted company, earlier known as Financial Technologies Ltd, in its petition filed on July 4 questioned `delayed' action by the Central Bureau of Investigation against the senior Congress leader and bureaucrats K P Krishnan and Ramesh Abhishek. Abhishek was chairman of the Forward Markets Commission and Krishnan was an additional secretary and joint secretary in the Ministry of Finance when Chidambaram was Finance Minister. On February 15, 2019, 63 moons filed a complaint with the CBI, seeking that a case be registered against the three for `abusing' their official positions and causing damage to the company when the multi-crore payment default scam at National Spot Exchange Limited (NSEL) came to light. On June 20, 2019, the company filed a petition in the high court, seeking a direction to the CBI to register an FIR. In August 2019, the CBI informed the court that after verification of the complaint, an inquiry will be initiated. The petition said that in March 2020 it sent a letter to the CBI seeking to know the status of inquiry. The latter informed that its complaint has been forwarded to the Chief Vigilance Officer for approval by the competent authority. "Four months have lapsed since then and there has been no further communication from the CBI. The CBI has failed to register an FIR," the petition said. The company has accused Chidambaram and the other two of taking "malicious and malafide" action against it when the NSEL scam came to light in 2012-2013. On July 10, a division bench of the high court posted the petition for hearing to July 17.

Petition filed in Bombay HC seeking speedy inquiry against Chidambaram

The Centre on Tuesday opposed and sought dismissal of a petition seeking declaration of funds received by the Prime Ministers Citizens Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situation (PM CARES), a public charitable trust created by the government amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh told the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court that the petition, filed by advocate Arvind Waghmare, should be dismissed.

A similar petition against setting up of the PM CARES fund was dismissed by the Supreme Court in April, he informed a division bench of Justices S B Shukre and A S Kilor.

The bench, however, noted that the petition before it was seeking different reliefs, and directed the Union government to file an affidavit in response to the plea within two weeks.

"File an affidavit stating whatever is your (Union government's) stand, the court said.

Waghmare in his petition sought a direction to the government to declare funds received and expenditure of the same on the governments website periodically.

As per the plea, thePMCAREStrust, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi as its chairperson and ministers from departments of Defence, Home and Finance as its members, was created with the prime objective of dealing with the emergency or distress caused by the coronavirus.

The trust was created in order to have financial assistance from people in the country and also from overseas to provide relief and assistance to those affected by COVID-19 pandemic, it said.

As per the guidelines of thePMCARESFund, apart from the chairperson and three other trustees, the chairperson had to appoint or nominate three more trustees. However, from the formation of the trust on March 28, 2020 till date no appointment has been made, the petition claimed.

The petition has sought a direction to the government and the trust to appoint or nominate at least two members from opposition parties to have proper check and transparency.

"In order to fortify and strengthen general public's faith and confidence, it is necessary to issue a direction to the government to declare the funds collected by PM CARES trust till date, and how the same have been used for the benefits of citizens affected by coronavirus, the plea said.&nbsp;

The Centre on Tuesday opposed and sought dismissal of a petition seeking declaration of funds received by the Prime Ministers Citizens Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situation (PM CARES), a public charitable trust created by the government amid the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Centre on Tuesday opposed and sought dismissal of a petition seeking declaration of funds received by the Prime Ministers Citizens Assistance and Relief in Emergency Situation (PM CARES), a public charitable trust created by the government amid the COVID-19 pandemic. Additional Solicitor General Anil Singh told the Nagpur bench of Bombay High Court that the petition, filed by advocate Arvind Waghmare, should be dismissed. A similar petition against setting up of the PM CARES fund was dismissed by the Supreme Court in April, he informed a division bench of Justices S B Shukre and A S Kilor. The bench, however, noted that the petition before it was seeking different reliefs, and directed the Union government to file an affidavit in response to the plea within two weeks. "File an affidavit stating whatever is your (Union government's) stand, the court said. Waghmare in his petition sought a direction to the government to declare funds received and expenditure of the same on the governments website periodically. As per the plea, thePMCAREStrust, with Prime Minister Narendra Modi as its chairperson and ministers from departments of Defence, Home and Finance as its members, was created with the prime objective of dealing with the emergency or distress caused by the coronavirus. The trust was created in order to have financial assistance from people in the country and also from overseas to provide relief and assistance to those affected by COVID-19 pandemic, it said. As per the guidelines of thePMCARESFund, apart from the chairperson and three other trustees, the chairperson had to appoint or nominate three more trustees. However, from the formation of the trust on March 28, 2020 till date no appointment has been made, the petition claimed. The petition has sought a direction to the government and the trust to appoint or nominate at least two members from opposition parties to have proper check and transparency. "In order to fortify and strengthen general public's faith and confidence, it is necessary to issue a direction to the government to declare the funds collected by PM CARES trust till date, and how the same have been used for the benefits of citizens affected by coronavirus, the plea said.

Centre opposes in HC plea on declaration of PM CARES funds

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/bombay-high-court-rules-youtuber-to-pull-down-video-criticising-coconut-oil-275727">Bombay High Court</a> on Thursday granted bail to former media tycoon <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/special-court-issues-production-warrant-against-peter-mukerjea-for-involvement-in-inx-media-case-265356">Peter Mukerjea</a>, an accused arrested in the sensational <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/bombay-high-court-refuses-to-grant-bail-to-peter-mukerjea-allows-him-to-take-post-operation-therapy-216989">Sheena Bora</a> murder case.

However, the High Court stayed the implementation of its order for six weeks to enable the CBI to file an appeal in the matter.

Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/special-court-issues-production-warrant-against-peter-mukerjea-for-involvement-in-inx-media-case-265356">Special court issues production warrant against Peter Mukerjea for involvement in INX media case</a>

Earlier, Justice Nitin W. Sambre granted him bail on a surety of Rs 200,000 to Mukerjea who was arrested over four years ago and was in jail since barring release briefly on medical grounds.

He has been granted on the "merits of the case and his medical conditions".&nbsp;He will not be allowed to contact his children Rahul and Vidhi.

Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/bombay-high-court-refuses-to-grant-bail-to-peter-mukerjea-allows-him-to-take-post-operation-therapy-216989">Bombay high court refuses to grant bail to Peter Mukerjea, allows him to take post-operation therapy</a>

Peter Mukerjea has been&nbsp;accused of murdering his daughter <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/bombay-high-court-refuses-to-grant-bail-to-peter-mukerjea-allows-him-to-take-post-operation-therapy-216989">Sheena Bora</a> over a financial dispute in 2012.&nbsp;

The alleged crime came to the fore three years later, in 2015, for which he was charged for conspiracy.

Mukerjea's wife <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/bombay-high-court-refuses-to-grant-bail-to-peter-mukerjea-allows-him-to-take-post-operation-therapy-216989">Indrani</a> is the prime accused in the case and is currently lodged in Mumbai's Byculla jail. 
&nbsp; 
The trial, in this case, has been taking place at the special <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/bombay-high-court-refuses-to-grant-bail-to-peter-mukerjea-allows-him-to-take-post-operation-therapy-216989">CBI </a>court.

The Bombay High Court on Thursday granted bail to former media tycoon Peter Mukerjea, an accused arrested in the sensational Sheena Bora murder case. However, the High Court stayed the implementation of its order for six weeks to enable the CBI to file an appeal in the matter.

The Bombay High Court on Thursday granted bail to former media tycoon Peter Mukerjea, an accused arrested in the sensational Sheena Bora murder case. However, the High Court stayed the implementation of its order for six weeks to enable the CBI to file an appeal in the matter. Also read: Special court issues production warrant against Peter Mukerjea for involvement in INX media case Earlier, Justice Nitin W. Sambre granted him bail on a surety of Rs 200,000 to Mukerjea who was arrested over four years ago and was in jail since barring release briefly on medical grounds. He has been granted on the "merits of the case and his medical conditions". He will not be allowed to contact his children Rahul and Vidhi. Also read: Bombay high court refuses to grant bail to Peter Mukerjea, allows him to take post-operation therapy Peter Mukerjea has been accused of murdering his daughter Sheena Bora over a financial dispute in 2012. The alleged crime came to the fore three years later, in 2015, for which he was charged for conspiracy. Mukerjea's wife Indrani is the prime accused in the case and is currently lodged in Mumbai's Byculla jail. The trial, in this case, has been taking place at the special CBI court.

Bombay High Court grants bail to Peter Mukerjea in Sheena Bora murder case

In a landmark judgement, Bombay High Court on Tuesday ruled against a social media influencer who criticised a&nbsp;coconut brand.

The observed&nbsp;that while it is necessary to have freedom of speech and expression but it is also important to regulate it&nbsp;so it does not harm anyone or their reputation.

Vlogger, Abhijeet Bhansali, known as "Bearded Chokra" on Youtube was dragged to court last week by Marico industries after he put out a video criticising their product Parachute coconut oil. Bhansali recommended people not to buy the Marico's coconut oil. He also gave alternatives to the product at the end of the video.

While hearing the case, judge SJ Kathawali ruled:&nbsp;&nbsp;"It is not in dispute that commercial speech is a part of the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. However, it cannot be that the fundamental right so guaranteed under the Consitution that it can be abused by any individual by maligning or disparaging the product of others, as is done in the present case".

While giving the judgement, the High Court also said that social media influencers should exercise their right to free speech and expression "cautiously"&nbsp;in order to ensure that their message does not harm anyone’s reputation.

"In my view, social media influencers are aware of the influence they wield over other audience and that their statements have a magnified and profound impact on their audience… It is apparent that a social media influencer, such as the present defendant&nbsp;wields the power to influence the public mind. With power also comes responsibility. I do not believe that social media influencer can deliver statements with the same impunity available to an ordinary person. Such a person bears a higher burden to ensure there is a degree of truthfulness in his statements," the judge Kathawali observed.

The court then asked the Bhansali to take down the video and he has been given a week to challenge the court's verdict.

However, the court refused to accept Marico's request to stop Bhansali from uploading any such videos in the future. The court said that the video Bhansali will upload in future will be dealt with in its own merit.

Bhansali's channel 'Beared Chokra' has over one lakh followers. Meanwhile, his video titled "Is Parachute Coconut Oil 100% pure?" has over 20 lakh views.

In a landmark judgement, Bombay High Court on Tuesday ruled against a social media influencer who criticised a coconut brand. The observed that while it is necessary to have freedom of speech and expression but it is also important to regulate it so it does not harm anyone or their reputation.

In a landmark judgement, Bombay High Court on Tuesday ruled against a social media influencer who criticised a coconut brand. The observed that while it is necessary to have freedom of speech and expression but it is also important to regulate it so it does not harm anyone or their reputation. Vlogger, Abhijeet Bhansali, known as "Bearded Chokra" on Youtube was dragged to court last week by Marico industries after he put out a video criticising their product Parachute coconut oil. Bhansali recommended people not to buy the Marico's coconut oil. He also gave alternatives to the product at the end of the video. While hearing the case, judge SJ Kathawali ruled: "It is not in dispute that commercial speech is a part of the fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. However, it cannot be that the fundamental right so guaranteed under the Consitution that it can be abused by any individual by maligning or disparaging the product of others, as is done in the present case". While giving the judgement, the High Court also said that social media influencers should exercise their right to free speech and expression "cautiously" in order to ensure that their message does not harm anyone’s reputation. "In my view, social media influencers are aware of the influence they wield over other audience and that their statements have a magnified and profound impact on their audience… It is apparent that a social media influencer, such as the present defendant wields the power to influence the public mind. With power also comes responsibility. I do not believe that social media influencer can deliver statements with the same impunity available to an ordinary person. Such a person bears a higher burden to ensure there is a degree of truthfulness in his statements," the judge Kathawali observed. The court then asked the Bhansali to take down the video and he has been given a week to challenge the court's verdict. However, the court refused to accept Marico's request to stop Bhansali from uploading any such videos in the future. The court said that the video Bhansali will upload in future will be dealt with in its own merit. Bhansali's channel 'Beared Chokra' has over one lakh followers. Meanwhile, his video titled "Is Parachute Coconut Oil 100% pure?" has over 20 lakh views.

Social media influencer has higher burden to ensure degree of truthfulness: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court on Thursday agreed to hear the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) which sought relief from an RBI order of Rs 10,000 withdrawal limit in Punjab and Maharashtra Co-operative (PMC) Bank.

The plea was filed by a Mumbai-based NGO, Consumer Action Network (CAN) which is fighting the case on the behalf of account holders who are facing the brunt of the RBI`s order which was passed a few weeks ago.

The petition was first filed by the non-profit organisation on September 30.

The RBI had rolled out an order stating that PMC Bank will not do any business for the next six months and will cap depositors withdrawals at Rs 10,000.

It is believed that this order has left an impact on the customers of financial institutions who are traders and daily wage earners.

Not only that, as many as two PMC Bank customers died within 24 hours, including one Fattomal Punjabi and a 51-year-old former employee of Jet Airways named Sanjay Gulati.

Their families have alleged that they were "under stress" over the crisis in PMC Bank.

Also, two former officials of the bank`s regulator and six PMC bank employees are at present under the scanner of EOW for their alleged involvement in the scam.

A few weeks ago, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has seized and identified movable and immovable assets worth more than Rs 3,830 crore owned by Housing Development and Infrastructure Limited (HDIL) in connection with the case.

The Mumbai court also has sent former PMC chairman Waryam Singh and HDIL promoters Rakesh Wadhawan and Sarang Wadhawan to the police custody in alleged connection with the bank fraud case.

The Esplanade court in Mumbai remanded the trio to police custody till October 16. According to the police, PMC bank officials gave loans to HDIL between 2008 and 2019 despite no repayment of the previous loans.&nbsp;

 
&nbsp;

The Bombay High Court on Thursday agreed to hear the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) which sought relief from an RBI order of Rs 10,000 withdrawal limit in Punjab and Maharashtra Co-operative (PMC) Bank.

The Bombay High Court on Thursday agreed to hear the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) which sought relief from an RBI order of Rs 10,000 withdrawal limit in Punjab and Maharashtra Co-operative (PMC) Bank. The plea was filed by a Mumbai-based NGO, Consumer Action Network (CAN) which is fighting the case on the behalf of account holders who are facing the brunt of the RBI`s order which was passed a few weeks ago. The petition was first filed by the non-profit organisation on September 30. The RBI had rolled out an order stating that PMC Bank will not do any business for the next six months and will cap depositors withdrawals at Rs 10,000. It is believed that this order has left an impact on the customers of financial institutions who are traders and daily wage earners. Not only that, as many as two PMC Bank customers died within 24 hours, including one Fattomal Punjabi and a 51-year-old former employee of Jet Airways named Sanjay Gulati. Their families have alleged that they were "under stress" over the crisis in PMC Bank. Also, two former officials of the bank`s regulator and six PMC bank employees are at present under the scanner of EOW for their alleged involvement in the scam. A few weeks ago, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has seized and identified movable and immovable assets worth more than Rs 3,830 crore owned by Housing Development and Infrastructure Limited (HDIL) in connection with the case. The Mumbai court also has sent former PMC chairman Waryam Singh and HDIL promoters Rakesh Wadhawan and Sarang Wadhawan to the police custody in alleged connection with the bank fraud case. The Esplanade court in Mumbai remanded the trio to police custody till October 16. According to the police, PMC bank officials gave loans to HDIL between 2008 and 2019 despite no repayment of the previous loans.

Bombay HC agrees to hear PIL seeking relief from RBI order on withdrawal limit in PMC bank

Twenty-nine protestors were released from Thane jail after bail was granted to them on Sunday.

They were arrested from Aarey on charges of disturbing public order and obstructing government officials from performing their duties.

The Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Ltd (MMRCL) started axing the trees on Friday night after the Bombay High Court rejected a bunch of petitions filed by NGOs and activists against the tree felling.&nbsp;

Resolved to save the trees, many protestors gathered at the site to raise their voice against the felling of trees.&nbsp;

Later, more people joined the protestors near the Aarey colony area, where the Mumbai Police imposed Section 144, thereby banning unlawful assembly.

The police had detained at least 84 protestors for allegedly disturbing public order and obstructing government officials from performing their duties.&nbsp;

Twenty-nine out of 84 protestors were sent to five-day judicial custody by a local court on Saturday. The 29 protestors were granted bail on Sunday by Dindoshi court on a cash bond of Rs 7,000 each and asked to appear at the police station for further inquiry.

A special bench of the Supreme Court is currently hearing the plea submitted by a group of law students protesting against the felling of trees in Mumbai`s Aarey Colony for construction of a metro car shed.

Twenty-nine protestors were released from Thane jail after bail was granted to them on Sunday. They were arrested from Aarey on charges of disturbing public order and obstructing government officials from performing their duties.

Twenty-nine protestors were released from Thane jail after bail was granted to them on Sunday. They were arrested from Aarey on charges of disturbing public order and obstructing government officials from performing their duties. The Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Ltd (MMRCL) started axing the trees on Friday night after the Bombay High Court rejected a bunch of petitions filed by NGOs and activists against the tree felling. Resolved to save the trees, many protestors gathered at the site to raise their voice against the felling of trees. Later, more people joined the protestors near the Aarey colony area, where the Mumbai Police imposed Section 144, thereby banning unlawful assembly. The police had detained at least 84 protestors for allegedly disturbing public order and obstructing government officials from performing their duties. Twenty-nine out of 84 protestors were sent to five-day judicial custody by a local court on Saturday. The 29 protestors were granted bail on Sunday by Dindoshi court on a cash bond of Rs 7,000 each and asked to appear at the police station for further inquiry. A special bench of the Supreme Court is currently hearing the plea submitted by a group of law students protesting against the felling of trees in Mumbai`s Aarey Colony for construction of a metro car shed.

Aarey row: 29 protesters released from Thane jail

The Bombay High Court on Friday sent a Goa beach shack worker to jail for 10 years over the sexual assault and killing of British schoolgirl Scarlett Keeling on a Goa beach in 2008.

The Court ordered the maximum sentence against Samson D'Souza after finding him guilty on Wednesday of culpable homicide, sexual assault on a minor, provision of drugs and destruction of evidence.

The 15-year-old's bruised and half-naked body was found in shallow water on a beach in Goa. Her death and her mother Fiona MacKeown's fight for justice made international headlines, shining a spotlight on the seedy side of the popular resort destination as well as on India's sluggish justice system.

"Ten years is an appropriate punishment for anyone indulging in child abuse of this gravity," Vikram Varma, a lawyer for MacKeown, told AFP.

Special prosecutor Eijaz Khan sought the maximum term and opposed any&nbsp;leniency, arguing that D'Souza should have protected the minor girl.

"Instead they gave her drugs and liquor and finally left her to die on the beach, without informing anyone," said the prosecutor.

Khan also sought compensation for Keeling's mother for the "severe hardship and pain caused to her in a foreign land."

D'Souza, 39, was arrested soon after the killing and acquitted in 2016 along with another man Placido Carvalho when a Goa court ruled there was not enough evidence.&nbsp;

Carvalho's acquittal was upheld by the High Court on Wednesday.

"It's been a long 10 years of waiting for justice. It felt like they had sentenced us instead," MacKeown told AFP from Britain.&nbsp;

"It is an important verdict and I am glad justice has finally been served," the 55-year-old said.&nbsp;

Police initially dismissed Keeling's death as an accidental drowning but opened a murder investigation after MacKeown pushed for a second autopsy which proved she had been drugged and raped.

It showed that Keeling had suffered more than 50 injuries to her body.

The case was taken over by federal police who accused D'Souza and Carvalho of plying Keeling with a cocktail of drink and illegal drugs, including cocaine, before leaving her to die by dumping her unconscious in shallow water where she drowned.

The pair claimed the teenager died accidentally after taking drugs of her own volition.

The Bombay High Court on Friday sent a Goa beach shack worker to jail for 10 years over the sexual assault and killing of British schoolgirl Scarlett Keeling on a Goa beach in 2008.

The Bombay High Court on Friday sent a Goa beach shack worker to jail for 10 years over the sexual assault and killing of British schoolgirl Scarlett Keeling on a Goa beach in 2008. The Court ordered the maximum sentence against Samson D'Souza after finding him guilty on Wednesday of culpable homicide, sexual assault on a minor, provision of drugs and destruction of evidence. The 15-year-old's bruised and half-naked body was found in shallow water on a beach in Goa. Her death and her mother Fiona MacKeown's fight for justice made international headlines, shining a spotlight on the seedy side of the popular resort destination as well as on India's sluggish justice system. "Ten years is an appropriate punishment for anyone indulging in child abuse of this gravity," Vikram Varma, a lawyer for MacKeown, told AFP. Special prosecutor Eijaz Khan sought the maximum term and opposed any leniency, arguing that D'Souza should have protected the minor girl. "Instead they gave her drugs and liquor and finally left her to die on the beach, without informing anyone," said the prosecutor. Khan also sought compensation for Keeling's mother for the "severe hardship and pain caused to her in a foreign land." D'Souza, 39, was arrested soon after the killing and acquitted in 2016 along with another man Placido Carvalho when a Goa court ruled there was not enough evidence. Carvalho's acquittal was upheld by the High Court on Wednesday. "It's been a long 10 years of waiting for justice. It felt like they had sentenced us instead," MacKeown told AFP from Britain. "It is an important verdict and I am glad justice has finally been served," the 55-year-old said. Police initially dismissed Keeling's death as an accidental drowning but opened a murder investigation after MacKeown pushed for a second autopsy which proved she had been drugged and raped. It showed that Keeling had suffered more than 50 injuries to her body. The case was taken over by federal police who accused D'Souza and Carvalho of plying Keeling with a cocktail of drink and illegal drugs, including cocaine, before leaving her to die by dumping her unconscious in shallow water where she drowned. The pair claimed the teenager died accidentally after taking drugs of her own volition.

Bombay High Court jails beach shack worker for 10 years in Scarlett Keeling death case

The Bombay High Court on Thursday dismissed a plea of beleaguered liquor baron <a href="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/india-news/the-royal-courts-of-justice-in-london-approves-vijay-mallyas-plea-to-appeal-against-extradition-case-232488&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjPwanR0KzjAhUf6XMBHUs6D24QFjACegQIEBAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw29DzLvQBvPK-IBuw-Qhdqq">Vijay Mallya</a> seeking a stay on the procedure for the confiscation of his properties by the government agencies in connection with a Rs 9,000-crore money laundering and fraud case.

A division bench of Justices Akil Kureshi and SJ Kathawala refused to grant any relief to 63-year-old Mallya.

In his petition, he has also sought protection till the high court heard his plea challenging the Fugitive Economic Offender (FEO) tag on him and the constitutional validity of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act (FEOA).

Mallya was declared an FEO by a special PMLA court in Mumbai in January this year.

He had fled India in March 2016 and has been living in the United Kingdom since then.

The Bombay High Court on Thursday dismissed a plea of beleaguered liquor baron Vijay Mallya seeking a stay on the procedure for the confiscation of his properties by the government agencies in connection with a Rs 9,000-crore money laundering and fraud case.

The Bombay High Court on Thursday dismissed a plea of beleaguered liquor baron Vijay Mallya seeking a stay on the procedure for the confiscation of his properties by the government agencies in connection with a Rs 9,000-crore money laundering and fraud case. A division bench of Justices Akil Kureshi and SJ Kathawala refused to grant any relief to 63-year-old Mallya. In his petition, he has also sought protection till the high court heard his plea challenging the Fugitive Economic Offender (FEO) tag on him and the constitutional validity of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act (FEOA). Mallya was declared an FEO by a special PMLA court in Mumbai in January this year. He had fled India in March 2016 and has been living in the United Kingdom since then.

Bombay High Court dismisses Vijay Mallya's plea on confiscation of properties

The Bombay High Court on Thursday upheld the constitutional validity of reservation for the Maratha community in government jobs and education.

A division bench of Justices Ranjit More and Bharati Dangre, however, said the quota percentage should be reduced from 16 per cent to 12 to 13 per cent, as recommended by the State Backward Classes Commission.

"We hold and declare that the state government possesses legislative competence to create a separate category of the Socially and Educationally Backward Class (SEBC) and grant reservation," the court said.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/maratha-reservations-issue-a-timeline-230879">Maratha Reservations Issue: A Timeline</a>

"We, however, have held that the 16 per cent should be reduced to 12 to 13 per cent as recommended by the commission," the bench said.

The court was hearing a bunch of petitions challenging Maharashtra government's decision granting 16 per cent reservation to the Maratha community in government jobs and educational institutions.

On November 30, 2018, the Maharashtra legislature passed a bill granting 16 per cent reservation in education and government jobs for the Marathas, declared a socially and educationally backward class by the state government.

The reservation will be in addition to the existing 52 per cent overall reservation in the state. With the 16 per cent reservation for Marathas, the reservation quantum in the state was expected to rise to 68 per cent.

Several petitions were filed in the court challenging the reservation, while a few others were filed in its support.

The petitions challenging the quota decision had argued that it was violative of Supreme Court's orders which say that reservation in any state should not exceed more than 50 per cent.

The government, while defending its decision, had said that it was meant to alleviate the Maratha community, which it said was socially and economically backward.

The Bombay High Court on Thursday upheld the constitutional validity of reservation for the Maratha community in government jobs and education. A division bench of Justices Ranjit More and Bharati Dangre, however, said the quota percentage should be reduced from 16 per cent to 12 to 13 per cent, as recommended by the State Backward Classes Commission.

The Bombay High Court on Thursday upheld the constitutional validity of reservation for the Maratha community in government jobs and education. A division bench of Justices Ranjit More and Bharati Dangre, however, said the quota percentage should be reduced from 16 per cent to 12 to 13 per cent, as recommended by the State Backward Classes Commission. "We hold and declare that the state government possesses legislative competence to create a separate category of the Socially and Educationally Backward Class (SEBC) and grant reservation," the court said. Maratha Reservations Issue: A Timeline "We, however, have held that the 16 per cent should be reduced to 12 to 13 per cent as recommended by the commission," the bench said. The court was hearing a bunch of petitions challenging Maharashtra government's decision granting 16 per cent reservation to the Maratha community in government jobs and educational institutions. On November 30, 2018, the Maharashtra legislature passed a bill granting 16 per cent reservation in education and government jobs for the Marathas, declared a socially and educationally backward class by the state government. The reservation will be in addition to the existing 52 per cent overall reservation in the state. With the 16 per cent reservation for Marathas, the reservation quantum in the state was expected to rise to 68 per cent. Several petitions were filed in the court challenging the reservation, while a few others were filed in its support. The petitions challenging the quota decision had argued that it was violative of Supreme Court's orders which say that reservation in any state should not exceed more than 50 per cent. The government, while defending its decision, had said that it was meant to alleviate the Maratha community, which it said was socially and economically backward.

Maratha quota valid but should be cut from 16 to 12-13 per cent: Bombay High Court

The police may have given <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/tanushree-dutta-sexual-harassment-case-police-gives-nana-patekar-clean-chit-closes-the-case-226825">a clean chit to actor Nana Patekar</a>, but actress Tanushree Dutta is not giving up just yet. The actress is likely to file a petition at the Bombay High Court in the coming days.&nbsp;

On Thursday, the Mumbai Police investigating the case submitted the report in court which stated that they didn't found any evidence against Nana gave him a clean chit.&nbsp;

Now, Dutta's lawyer Nitin Satpute has stated that they are yet to receive the official report from the police and only after receiving the B-Summary report, they will file a writ petition and challenge the report in the Bombay High Court.

A 'B-Summary' report is filed when the police do not find any evidence against the accused person to file a charge sheet and seek trial.

As Patekar was given a clean chit, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/tanushree-dutta-responds-to-nana-patekars-clean-chit-says-neither-shocked-nor-surprised-226848">Dutta had stated that she was not surprised or shocked</a>. "I'm neither shocked nor surprised being a woman in India, this is something we all have got used to. I mean if rape accused Alok Nath got a clean chit and returned to movies then surely it was not going to be difficult for harassment accused Nana Patekar to get himself or shall we say buy himself a clean chit to continue to bully hapless young women.”

She added, “But the proof is in the pudding and a gentle reminder to the Indian public to watch the video of my car being mercilessly attacked and broken while I and my family tried to escape from these monsters on ‘Horn OK Please’ set 10 years ago. After this, if you still decide to watch their movies and support then it's your bad karma. You are a corrupt people with no justice but Gods justice will rain on you someday hopefully and will avenge for all the humiliation, insult, harassment, judgment and trauma I have had to endure in the last 10+ years because of this attitude.”

In October 2018, Tanushree had accused Nana Patekar of behaving inappropriately with her on the sets of her film ‘Horn Ok Pleassss’ back in 2008. She had alleged that the actor had forcefully tried to introduce intimate steps into the choreography of a special song in the film which Dutta was a part of. According to her, choreographer Ganesh Acharya had refused to intervene. Tanushree, eventually, had walked out of the film and Rakhi Sawant replaced her in the song.

The police may have given a clean chit to actor Nana Patekar, but actress Tanushree Dutta is not giving up just yet. The actress is likely to file a petition at the Bombay High Court in the coming days.

The police may have given a clean chit to actor Nana Patekar, but actress Tanushree Dutta is not giving up just yet. The actress is likely to file a petition at the Bombay High Court in the coming days. On Thursday, the Mumbai Police investigating the case submitted the report in court which stated that they didn't found any evidence against Nana gave him a clean chit. Now, Dutta's lawyer Nitin Satpute has stated that they are yet to receive the official report from the police and only after receiving the B-Summary report, they will file a writ petition and challenge the report in the Bombay High Court. A 'B-Summary' report is filed when the police do not find any evidence against the accused person to file a charge sheet and seek trial. As Patekar was given a clean chit, Dutta had stated that she was not surprised or shocked. "I'm neither shocked nor surprised being a woman in India, this is something we all have got used to. I mean if rape accused Alok Nath got a clean chit and returned to movies then surely it was not going to be difficult for harassment accused Nana Patekar to get himself or shall we say buy himself a clean chit to continue to bully hapless young women.” She added, “But the proof is in the pudding and a gentle reminder to the Indian public to watch the video of my car being mercilessly attacked and broken while I and my family tried to escape from these monsters on ‘Horn OK Please’ set 10 years ago. After this, if you still decide to watch their movies and support then it's your bad karma. You are a corrupt people with no justice but Gods justice will rain on you someday hopefully and will avenge for all the humiliation, insult, harassment, judgment and trauma I have had to endure in the last 10+ years because of this attitude.” In October 2018, Tanushree had accused Nana Patekar of behaving inappropriately with her on the sets of her film ‘Horn Ok Pleassss’ back in 2008. She had alleged that the actor had forcefully tried to introduce intimate steps into the choreography of a special song in the film which Dutta was a part of. According to her, choreographer Ganesh Acharya had refused to intervene. Tanushree, eventually, had walked out of the film and Rakhi Sawant replaced her in the song.

Tanushree Dutta likely to file petition in Bombay High Court as Nana Patekar gets a clean chit

Actor-singer Karan Oberoi, who was arrested on charges of raping a woman, has been released on bail by the Bombay High Court. &nbsp;Granting a Rs 50,000 bail to Oberoi, Justice Revati Mohite-Dere came down heavily on the victim and police in the matter, the actor's lawyer Dinesh Tiwari said. Karan was arrested on 6th May.

In May, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/actor-karan-oberoi-arrested-for-raping-blackmailing-woman-216391">a woman alleged that Oberoi had raped her</a> on the pretext of marrying her. Oberoi was said to be in a relationship with the woman since 2016.&nbsp;

He also shot some objectionable videos of the woman and demanded money from her while threatening to release the clips, the police had alleged.&nbsp;

Based on the woman's complaint, Oberoi was arrested on 6th May. Meanwhile, many of Oberoi's friends, including his fellow 'Band Of Boys' members and actress Pooja Bedi rallied in favour of him stating that he could never do something like this.&nbsp;

Oberoi was initially arrested and sent to police custody. He was later moved to 14-day judicial custody even as his bail plea was pending with the sessions court.

In the bail plea, Tiwari contended that the FIR was false, his client (Oberoi) never promised to marry the victim, and the victim lodged another FIR by staging an attack to deny him bail.

While granting relief to Oberoi, the judge noted that the woman, on May 25, "orchestrated" a fake attack on herself and tried to make it look like she was targeted because of her complaint against the actor.

"...To ensure that the applicant (Oberoi) does not get bail, the complainant orchestrated an attack on herself," Justice Dere said.

The HC also noted that the complainant wanted to marry Oberoi, but he declined and began to avoid her.

The messages exchanged between the woman and Oberoi showed that she voluntarily purchased gifts for him and he had not made any demands, the judge said.

The judge also reprimanded police for the way the probe was being conducted.

"Much needs to be said about the manner in which probe has been carried out. The police is yet to seize the mobile phones of the complainant. We expect the police to conduct a free, fair and impartial investigation," Justice Dere said.

Earlier, the sessions court had rejected Oberoi's bail plea. 
&nbsp;

Actor-singer Karan Oberoi, who was arrested on charges of raping a woman, has been released on bail by the Bombay High Court. Granting a Rs 50,000 bail to Oberoi, Justice Revati Mohite-Dere came down heavily on the victim and police in the matter, the actor's lawyer Dinesh Tiwari said.

Actor-singer Karan Oberoi, who was arrested on charges of raping a woman, has been released on bail by the Bombay High Court. Granting a Rs 50,000 bail to Oberoi, Justice Revati Mohite-Dere came down heavily on the victim and police in the matter, the actor's lawyer Dinesh Tiwari said. Karan was arrested on 6th May. In May, a woman alleged that Oberoi had raped her on the pretext of marrying her. Oberoi was said to be in a relationship with the woman since 2016. He also shot some objectionable videos of the woman and demanded money from her while threatening to release the clips, the police had alleged. Based on the woman's complaint, Oberoi was arrested on 6th May. Meanwhile, many of Oberoi's friends, including his fellow 'Band Of Boys' members and actress Pooja Bedi rallied in favour of him stating that he could never do something like this. Oberoi was initially arrested and sent to police custody. He was later moved to 14-day judicial custody even as his bail plea was pending with the sessions court. In the bail plea, Tiwari contended that the FIR was false, his client (Oberoi) never promised to marry the victim, and the victim lodged another FIR by staging an attack to deny him bail. While granting relief to Oberoi, the judge noted that the woman, on May 25, "orchestrated" a fake attack on herself and tried to make it look like she was targeted because of her complaint against the actor. "...To ensure that the applicant (Oberoi) does not get bail, the complainant orchestrated an attack on herself," Justice Dere said. The HC also noted that the complainant wanted to marry Oberoi, but he declined and began to avoid her. The messages exchanged between the woman and Oberoi showed that she voluntarily purchased gifts for him and he had not made any demands, the judge said. The judge also reprimanded police for the way the probe was being conducted. "Much needs to be said about the manner in which probe has been carried out. The police is yet to seize the mobile phones of the complainant. We expect the police to conduct a free, fair and impartial investigation," Justice Dere said. Earlier, the sessions court had rejected Oberoi's bail plea.

Bombay High Court grants bail to Karan Oberoi, arrested on charges of rape

Enforcement Directorate has termed as "misleading" the medical reports submitted by fugitive diamantaire Mehul Choksi, an accused in 13,000 crore PNB scam case, as an excuse for not appearing before the Bombay High Court.

The law enforcement agency, in its affidavit submitted before a division bench headed by Justice I A Mahanty, said that the submission made by Choksi to the court on his medical conditions appear to be "facades being erected merely to mislead the court in an obvious attempt to delay the lawful proceedings.

"The documentation submitted by the appellant are merely copies. In the absence of the original, both the genesis and veracity of the contents of the documents cannot relied upon by the court," read the ED affidavit.

Seeking dismissal of medical records submitted by Choksi, the ED stated that the intention of Choksi appeared to be suspicious as he "purposefully failed to submit the medical records February 17, 2018, onwards.

"The agency further submitted that Choksi underwent coronary angiography and coronary angioplasty in February 2018 but was allowed to return to work within 3-5 days.

"It is not clear as to what prevents him from undertaking travel after about 8-9 months from the date of undergoing the procedure.

"It further contended that the medical certificates dated October 26, 2018, and January 18, 2019, appears to from general practitioner instead of a cardiac expert.

"The medical certificates appear to have been specifically obtained to hoodwink the due process of law in India," the affidavit further stated.

ED said that no further time should be granted to the appellant to submit any other document at this stage.

"The intention of the appellant is clearly dilatory in the matter," the affidavit read.

The agency also sought dismissal of a plea moved my Choksi against the Special FEOA (Fugitive Economic Offenders Act) special court declaring him a fugitive offender.

In July last year, the ED had filed an application in the Special FEOA (Fugitive Economic Offenders Act) special court to declare Choksi an economic offender.

Soon thereafter, in October, Choksi filed applications seeking for the ED's plea to be dismissed.

The application was, however, dismissed by the special court following which he moved Bombay High Court challenging the order and sought for it to be set aside.

In the affidavit, the ED accused Choksi of "siphoning and laundering the proceeds of crime" generated in the PNB fraud case.

"Summons was issued to him but he has not joined the investigation. He is clearly a fugitive and absconder," ED submitted.

The matter will be taken up for hearing today.

Mehul Choksi and nephew Nirav Modi are key accused in the Punjab National Bank(PNB) fraud case.

They fled the country a year ago. The scam is estimated at two billion US dollars.

Choksi was granted citizenship of Antigua and Barbuda on January 15, 2018.&nbsp;

Enforcement Directorate has termed as "misleading" the medical reports submitted by fugitive diamantaire Mehul Choksi, an accused in 13,000 crore PNB scam case, as an excuse for not appearing before the Bombay High Court.

Enforcement Directorate has termed as "misleading" the medical reports submitted by fugitive diamantaire Mehul Choksi, an accused in 13,000 crore PNB scam case, as an excuse for not appearing before the Bombay High Court. The law enforcement agency, in its affidavit submitted before a division bench headed by Justice I A Mahanty, said that the submission made by Choksi to the court on his medical conditions appear to be "facades being erected merely to mislead the court in an obvious attempt to delay the lawful proceedings. "The documentation submitted by the appellant are merely copies. In the absence of the original, both the genesis and veracity of the contents of the documents cannot relied upon by the court," read the ED affidavit. Seeking dismissal of medical records submitted by Choksi, the ED stated that the intention of Choksi appeared to be suspicious as he "purposefully failed to submit the medical records February 17, 2018, onwards. "The agency further submitted that Choksi underwent coronary angiography and coronary angioplasty in February 2018 but was allowed to return to work within 3-5 days. "It is not clear as to what prevents him from undertaking travel after about 8-9 months from the date of undergoing the procedure. "It further contended that the medical certificates dated October 26, 2018, and January 18, 2019, appears to from general practitioner instead of a cardiac expert. "The medical certificates appear to have been specifically obtained to hoodwink the due process of law in India," the affidavit further stated. ED said that no further time should be granted to the appellant to submit any other document at this stage. "The intention of the appellant is clearly dilatory in the matter," the affidavit read. The agency also sought dismissal of a plea moved my Choksi against the Special FEOA (Fugitive Economic Offenders Act) special court declaring him a fugitive offender. In July last year, the ED had filed an application in the Special FEOA (Fugitive Economic Offenders Act) special court to declare Choksi an economic offender. Soon thereafter, in October, Choksi filed applications seeking for the ED's plea to be dismissed. The application was, however, dismissed by the special court following which he moved Bombay High Court challenging the order and sought for it to be set aside. In the affidavit, the ED accused Choksi of "siphoning and laundering the proceeds of crime" generated in the PNB fraud case. "Summons was issued to him but he has not joined the investigation. He is clearly a fugitive and absconder," ED submitted. The matter will be taken up for hearing today. Mehul Choksi and nephew Nirav Modi are key accused in the Punjab National Bank(PNB) fraud case. They fled the country a year ago. The scam is estimated at two billion US dollars. Choksi was granted citizenship of Antigua and Barbuda on January 15, 2018.

Medical reports of Mehul Choksi 'misleading': Enforcement Directorate tells Bombay high court

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/alleging-missteps-on-banks-side-mehul-choksis-lawyer-says-bank-destroyed-gitanjali-gems-215569">Diamantaire Mehul Choksi</a>, accused in the multi-crore Punjab National Bank scam, is a "fugitive and absconder", the Enforcement Directorate told the Bombay High Court on Monday.

The agency, in its affidavit, sought dismissal of two petitions filed by Choksi&nbsp;one against a plea for him to be declared a fugitive economic offender and the second to permit him to cross-examine those persons on whose statements the ED is relying on to declare Choksi a fugitive economic offender.

The ED, in its affidavit submitted on Monday to a division bench headed by Justice IA Mahanty, said Choksi is accused of siphoning and laundering money to the tune of Rs 6,097 crore in the PNB scam, and despite having issued summons directing him to appear before the agency, he has said he does not intend to cooperate with the probe.

"He is a fugitive and absconder. He has deliberately and intentionally evaded from appearing before the investigating agency even after a special court has issued non-bailable warrants against him. This shows that he does not have any regard for the law of the land," the affidavit said.

"It is apparent that the applicant (Choksi) has left India to avoid criminal prosecution for the offence of money laundering under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and continues to refuse to return to India to face criminal prosecution," it said.

It added that Choksi has already taken citizenship of Antigua which clearly shows that he has no intention of returning to India to cooperate with the probe.

The agency further said that under the Fugitive Economic Offender Act, if the fugitive appears in person before the court then the proceedings can be terminated. However, it said, if the person fails to do so the court can declare him a fugitive economic offender and can confiscate his properties.

"The sole purpose of the Act is to compel the fugitive to return to India and face the proceedings initiated against him," the affidavit said.

The Act was introduced as an effective, expeditious and constitutional way to stop offenders from running away, it added.

The high court will take up the petitions for hearing on Tuesday.

Choksi, in his plea, claimed he was unable to return to India due to persistent health problems.

To this, the ED said it was merely a facade and that Choksi can seek treatment for his health problems in India.

Choksi and his nephew Nirav Modi are wanted by the ED and the CBI for allegedly defrauding the PNB to the tune of Rs 13,400 crore, in collusion with a few of its employees.

The ED had filed an application before a special Prevention of Money Laundering Act court, seeking for Choksi to be declared a "fugitive economic offender" for evading summons to appear before the agency and for his properties be confiscated under the provisions of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018.

Choksi had then filed an application before the lower court, seeking for the ED's plea to be dismissed.

When the lower court rejected his application, Choksi approached the high court in April this year.&nbsp;

Diamantaire Mehul Choksi, accused in the multi-crore Punjab National Bank scam, is a "fugitive and absconder", the Enforcement Directorate told the Bombay High Court on Monday.

Diamantaire Mehul Choksi, accused in the multi-crore Punjab National Bank scam, is a "fugitive and absconder", the Enforcement Directorate told the Bombay High Court on Monday. The agency, in its affidavit, sought dismissal of two petitions filed by Choksi one against a plea for him to be declared a fugitive economic offender and the second to permit him to cross-examine those persons on whose statements the ED is relying on to declare Choksi a fugitive economic offender. The ED, in its affidavit submitted on Monday to a division bench headed by Justice IA Mahanty, said Choksi is accused of siphoning and laundering money to the tune of Rs 6,097 crore in the PNB scam, and despite having issued summons directing him to appear before the agency, he has said he does not intend to cooperate with the probe. "He is a fugitive and absconder. He has deliberately and intentionally evaded from appearing before the investigating agency even after a special court has issued non-bailable warrants against him. This shows that he does not have any regard for the law of the land," the affidavit said. "It is apparent that the applicant (Choksi) has left India to avoid criminal prosecution for the offence of money laundering under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act and continues to refuse to return to India to face criminal prosecution," it said. It added that Choksi has already taken citizenship of Antigua which clearly shows that he has no intention of returning to India to cooperate with the probe. The agency further said that under the Fugitive Economic Offender Act, if the fugitive appears in person before the court then the proceedings can be terminated. However, it said, if the person fails to do so the court can declare him a fugitive economic offender and can confiscate his properties. "The sole purpose of the Act is to compel the fugitive to return to India and face the proceedings initiated against him," the affidavit said. The Act was introduced as an effective, expeditious and constitutional way to stop offenders from running away, it added. The high court will take up the petitions for hearing on Tuesday. Choksi, in his plea, claimed he was unable to return to India due to persistent health problems. To this, the ED said it was merely a facade and that Choksi can seek treatment for his health problems in India. Choksi and his nephew Nirav Modi are wanted by the ED and the CBI for allegedly defrauding the PNB to the tune of Rs 13,400 crore, in collusion with a few of its employees. The ED had filed an application before a special Prevention of Money Laundering Act court, seeking for Choksi to be declared a "fugitive economic offender" for evading summons to appear before the agency and for his properties be confiscated under the provisions of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act, 2018. Choksi had then filed an application before the lower court, seeking for the ED's plea to be dismissed. When the lower court rejected his application, Choksi approached the high court in April this year.

Mehul Choksi 'fugitive and absconder', Enforcement Directorate tells Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court has sought to know from the Maharashtra government what measures it proposes to tackle "serious" issues like drought in the state.

A vacation bench of Justices Ajey Gadkari and N J Jamadar was hearing a petition filed by activist Sanjay Lakhe Patil, seeking setting up of independent disaster management committees in each district of the state.

Patil sought for implementation of the 2016 disaster management guidelines which listed several measures to be undertaken by the state government to tackle natural calamities and disasters, including drought.

When the petition was heard on Monday, Patil produced records before the court to show that water levels in dams and other resources had gone down in the state's Vidarbha and Marathwada regions.

"The issue is serious. We want some lawyer from the state government to inform us what measures the government proposes to take (to tackle the issue)," the court said.

The bench then posted the petition for further hearing on May 20.&nbsp;

The Bombay High Court has sought to know from the Maharashtra government what measures it proposes to tackle "serious" issues like drought in the state. A vacation bench of Justices Ajey Gadkari and N J Jamadar was hearing a petition filed by activist Sanjay Lakhe Patil, seeking setting up of independent disaster management committees in each district of the state.

The Bombay High Court has sought to know from the Maharashtra government what measures it proposes to tackle "serious" issues like drought in the state. A vacation bench of Justices Ajey Gadkari and N J Jamadar was hearing a petition filed by activist Sanjay Lakhe Patil, seeking setting up of independent disaster management committees in each district of the state. Patil sought for implementation of the 2016 disaster management guidelines which listed several measures to be undertaken by the state government to tackle natural calamities and disasters, including drought. When the petition was heard on Monday, Patil produced records before the court to show that water levels in dams and other resources had gone down in the state's Vidarbha and Marathwada regions. "The issue is serious. We want some lawyer from the state government to inform us what measures the government proposes to take (to tackle the issue)," the court said. The bench then posted the petition for further hearing on May 20.

High Court asks Maharashtra government about steps taken to tackle drought

The Bombay High Court Wednesday said it cannot grant bail to former media baron Peter Mukerjea, an accused in the killing of his step-daughter Sheena Bora, but directed jail authorities to take him for his post-operation cardiac rehabilitation sessions.

A vacation bench of Justice Riyaz Chagla said it was not inclined to order the release of Mukerjea at the Asian Heart Institute, where he underwent bypass surgery, submitted in a report to a special CBI court last month that he has recovered from the operation.

"I am, however, inclined to grant limited protection to the applicant (Mukerjea). It will be appropriate to permit the applicant to undergo post-operation cardiac rehabilitation sessions and physiotherapy at the Asian Heart Institute," Justice Chagla said in the order.

"The applicant shall be taken to the hospital under police escort for 26 sessions, as prescribed by the Asian Heart Institute," the court said.

Mukerjea last week approached the high court, seeking interim bail on medical ground. His lawyer Shrikant Shivade argued that Mukerjea was sent to jail without letting him undergo the post-operative care.

"Without the post-operation cardiac rehabilitation sessions and physiotherapy, he (Mukerjea) will die. Jail is not a proper place to be kept in after undergoing bypass surgery," he argued on Wednesday.

CBI counsel Ejaz Khan opposed the plea and relied on the Asian Heart Institute's report, which said Mukerjea was being discharged from the hospital as he had recovered from the surgery.

"The jail authorities shall take him (Mukerjea) to the hospital for the post-operation cardiac sessions. He need not be released on bail for this purpose," Khan argued.

Mukerjea has been in jail since his arrest in November 2015 for his alleged involvement in the killing of Sheena Bora, his wife Indrani Mukerjea's daughter from her previous relationship.

According to the Central Bureau of Investigation, Bora was killed in April 2012 but the case came to light only in August 2015 when Indrani Mukerjea's former driver Shyamwar Rai spilt the beans after being arrested in another case.

Indrani Mukerjea's former husband Sanjeev Khanna and Rai were also arrested in connection with the Sheena Bora killing the case.

However, Rai later turned an approver in the case.

The Bombay High Court Wednesday said it cannot grant bail to former media baron Peter Mukerjea, an accused in the killing of his step-daughter Sheena Bora, but directed jail authorities to take him for his post-operation cardiac rehabilitation sessions.

The Bombay High Court Wednesday said it cannot grant bail to former media baron Peter Mukerjea, an accused in the killing of his step-daughter Sheena Bora, but directed jail authorities to take him for his post-operation cardiac rehabilitation sessions. A vacation bench of Justice Riyaz Chagla said it was not inclined to order the release of Mukerjea at the Asian Heart Institute, where he underwent bypass surgery, submitted in a report to a special CBI court last month that he has recovered from the operation. "I am, however, inclined to grant limited protection to the applicant (Mukerjea). It will be appropriate to permit the applicant to undergo post-operation cardiac rehabilitation sessions and physiotherapy at the Asian Heart Institute," Justice Chagla said in the order. "The applicant shall be taken to the hospital under police escort for 26 sessions, as prescribed by the Asian Heart Institute," the court said. Mukerjea last week approached the high court, seeking interim bail on medical ground. His lawyer Shrikant Shivade argued that Mukerjea was sent to jail without letting him undergo the post-operative care. "Without the post-operation cardiac rehabilitation sessions and physiotherapy, he (Mukerjea) will die. Jail is not a proper place to be kept in after undergoing bypass surgery," he argued on Wednesday. CBI counsel Ejaz Khan opposed the plea and relied on the Asian Heart Institute's report, which said Mukerjea was being discharged from the hospital as he had recovered from the surgery. "The jail authorities shall take him (Mukerjea) to the hospital for the post-operation cardiac sessions. He need not be released on bail for this purpose," Khan argued. Mukerjea has been in jail since his arrest in November 2015 for his alleged involvement in the killing of Sheena Bora, his wife Indrani Mukerjea's daughter from her previous relationship. According to the Central Bureau of Investigation, Bora was killed in April 2012 but the case came to light only in August 2015 when Indrani Mukerjea's former driver Shyamwar Rai spilt the beans after being arrested in another case. Indrani Mukerjea's former husband Sanjeev Khanna and Rai were also arrested in connection with the Sheena Bora killing the case. However, Rai later turned an approver in the case.

Bombay high court refuses to grant bail to Peter Mukerjea, allows him to take post-operation therapy

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