The Tokyo District Court on Tuesday denied former <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/wife-says-ex-nissan-boss-ghosn-suffers-harsh-treatment-in-jail-190120">Nissan Motor Co Ltd Chairman Carlos Ghosn</a>'s request for release on bail after his indictment last week on two new charges, including for aggravated breach of trust.

Ghosn, the once-feted auto executive, awaits a lengthy criminal trial that could be as long as six months away, after his surprise arrest on November 19.

The Tokyo District Court on Tuesday denied former Nissan Motor Co Ltd Chairman Carlos Ghosn's request for release on bail after his indictment last week on two new charges, including for aggravated breach of trust.

The Tokyo District Court on Tuesday denied former Nissan Motor Co Ltd Chairman Carlos Ghosn's request for release on bail after his indictment last week on two new charges, including for aggravated breach of trust. Ghosn, the once-feted auto executive, awaits a lengthy criminal trial that could be as long as six months away, after his surprise arrest on November 19.

Tokyo court denies request for Carlos Ghosn's release on bail

An anti-corruption court in Pakistan will deliver its judgment on Monday in two remaining corruption cases against ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif.

Judge Muhammad Arshad Malik of Islamabad-based accountability court last week reserved the judgment after completion of hearing in the Flagship Investment and Al-Azizia cases against 68-year-old Sharif.

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/pakistans-court-to-announce-verdict-on-former-pm-nawaz-sharif-in-corruption-cases-185667">The verdict</a> will be announced on December 24, which is the revised deadline set by the Supreme Court to wrap up the remaining two corruption cases against the three-time former prime minister.

If found guilty, Sharif can be sentenced up to 14 years in jail.

The accountability court had indicted Sharif for holding assets beyond his known sources of income in August 2017.

Last week, the judge rejected an application by Sharif's lawyer Khawaja Harris to provide one week time to submit more documents but allowed him to provide any document by Friday last.

The judge also observed that the court was bound to follow December 24 final deadline set by the Supreme Court.

Three cases - Avenfield properties case, Flagship Investment case and Al-Azizia steel mills case - were launched by the National Accountability Bureau on September 8, 2017, &nbsp;following a judgment by the apex court that disqualified Sharif.

The apex court initially set a six-month deadline to conclude the cases but it was subsequently increased around eight times on the request of the accountability court.

Sharif was disqualified by the Supreme Court in the Panama Papers case in July 2017.

In July 2018 Sharif, his daughter Maryam and his son-in-law retired captain Mohammad Safdar were sentenced to 11 years, eight years and one year respectively in prison in the Avenfield properties case related to their purchase of four luxury flats in London through corrupt practices. However, the three were bailed out by the Islamabad High Court in September.

His two sons - Hassan and Hussain - were also co-accused in all three cases but they were declared absconders for failing to appear before the court even for a single time.

The court decided to hear their cases separately once they returned back.

The three-time former prime minister and his family have denied any wrongdoing.

Sharif, who religiously followed the proceeding by appearing before the court for at least 78 times, told the media after the court reserved the judgment last week that he not committed any corruption.

"Not a penny of corruption has been proven against me. I am very happy that I have done my duty, and I think that since I have stepped in politics I have never indulged in corruption nor have misused my power," he said.

Veteran politician Javed Hashmi on Saturday predicted that Sharif will be convicted in the Flagship and Al-Azizia case as "the institutions won't let these (cases) prove false".

Talking to the media in Multan, he said that the purpose of the NAB was to make politicians change their political loyalties.

"I will not accept this decision as Nawaz Sharif will be convicted at any cost," he was quoted as saying by Dawn newspaper.

An anti-corruption court in Pakistan will deliver its judgment on Monday in two remaining corruption cases against ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif. Judge Muhammad Arshad Malik of Islamabad-based accountability court last week reserved the judgment after completion of hearing in the Flagship Investment and Al-Azizia cases against 68-year-old Sharif.

An anti-corruption court in Pakistan will deliver its judgment on Monday in two remaining corruption cases against ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif. Judge Muhammad Arshad Malik of Islamabad-based accountability court last week reserved the judgment after completion of hearing in the Flagship Investment and Al-Azizia cases against 68-year-old Sharif. The verdict will be announced on December 24, which is the revised deadline set by the Supreme Court to wrap up the remaining two corruption cases against the three-time former prime minister. If found guilty, Sharif can be sentenced up to 14 years in jail. The accountability court had indicted Sharif for holding assets beyond his known sources of income in August 2017. Last week, the judge rejected an application by Sharif's lawyer Khawaja Harris to provide one week time to submit more documents but allowed him to provide any document by Friday last. The judge also observed that the court was bound to follow December 24 final deadline set by the Supreme Court. Three cases - Avenfield properties case, Flagship Investment case and Al-Azizia steel mills case - were launched by the National Accountability Bureau on September 8, 2017, following a judgment by the apex court that disqualified Sharif. The apex court initially set a six-month deadline to conclude the cases but it was subsequently increased around eight times on the request of the accountability court. Sharif was disqualified by the Supreme Court in the Panama Papers case in July 2017. In July 2018 Sharif, his daughter Maryam and his son-in-law retired captain Mohammad Safdar were sentenced to 11 years, eight years and one year respectively in prison in the Avenfield properties case related to their purchase of four luxury flats in London through corrupt practices. However, the three were bailed out by the Islamabad High Court in September. His two sons - Hassan and Hussain - were also co-accused in all three cases but they were declared absconders for failing to appear before the court even for a single time. The court decided to hear their cases separately once they returned back. The three-time former prime minister and his family have denied any wrongdoing. Sharif, who religiously followed the proceeding by appearing before the court for at least 78 times, told the media after the court reserved the judgment last week that he not committed any corruption. "Not a penny of corruption has been proven against me. I am very happy that I have done my duty, and I think that since I have stepped in politics I have never indulged in corruption nor have misused my power," he said. Veteran politician Javed Hashmi on Saturday predicted that Sharif will be convicted in the Flagship and Al-Azizia case as "the institutions won't let these (cases) prove false". Talking to the media in Multan, he said that the purpose of the NAB was to make politicians change their political loyalties. "I will not accept this decision as Nawaz Sharif will be convicted at any cost," he was quoted as saying by Dawn newspaper.

Two corruption cases against Nawaz Sharif, Pakistan court judgement due on December 24

Former Union Finance Minister P Chidambaram on Wednesday appeared before the Enforcement Directorate after being summoned by it in connection with the INX Media Case.

On November 29, the Delhi High Court had extended the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/inx-media-court-extends-interim-protection-chidambaram-168218">interim protection to Chidambaram</a> in connection with the INX Media case. He has been granted interim protection from the arrest till January 15 next year.

Chidambaram had filed an anticipatory bail plea in the Delhi High Court, seeking protection from the arrest by the CBI and the ED.&nbsp;

The senior Congress leader and his son Karti Chidambaram are under the scanner of the CBI and the ED in connection with the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance granted to INX Media, a venture promoted by former media baron Peter Mukherjea and Indrani Mukerjea.

The alleged irregularities took place in 2007 when Chidambaram was the Finance Minister under the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government led by then, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Chidambaram has denied all charges levelled by the central probe agency

Former Union Finance Minister P Chidambaram on Wednesday appeared before the Enforcement Directorate after being summoned by it in connection with the INX Media Case.

Former Union Finance Minister P Chidambaram on Wednesday appeared before the Enforcement Directorate after being summoned by it in connection with the INX Media Case. On November 29, the Delhi High Court had extended the interim protection to Chidambaram in connection with the INX Media case. He has been granted interim protection from the arrest till January 15 next year. Chidambaram had filed an anticipatory bail plea in the Delhi High Court, seeking protection from the arrest by the CBI and the ED. The senior Congress leader and his son Karti Chidambaram are under the scanner of the CBI and the ED in connection with the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance granted to INX Media, a venture promoted by former media baron Peter Mukherjea and Indrani Mukerjea. The alleged irregularities took place in 2007 when Chidambaram was the Finance Minister under the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government led by then, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. Chidambaram has denied all charges levelled by the central probe agency

INX Media case: Former Finance Minister P Chidambaram appears before Enforcement Directorate

Even as the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/maharashtra-government-proposes-16-quota-for-maratha-180173">Maharashtra government</a> has asserted that reservation for the Marathas would not affect existing quotas, an OBC organisation said Thursday that it would challenge the decision in the court.

The Maharashtra legislature has unanimously passed a bill granting 16 per cent quota in education and government jobs to the Maratha community.

"The quota for Marathas will surely affect the existing OBC reservation. So we have decided to approach the court," said J D Tandel, vice president of Panvel-Uran Aagri Samaj Mandal and OBC Sangharsh Samanvay Samiti.

The ruling BJP will have to pay a heavy price for this decision in coming elections, he claimed.

Another OBC leader demanded that the government conduct a caste-wise census in the state.

"How can we believe that there are 30 per cent Marathas in the state? The number is definitely less than that, so the government should conduct a caste-wise census," said Bhushan Bare of the Kunbi Samaj Unnati Sangh.&nbsp;

Even as the Maharashtra government has asserted that reservation for the Marathas would not affect existing quotas, an OBC organisation said Thursday that it would challenge the decision in the court.

Even as the Maharashtra government has asserted that reservation for the Marathas would not affect existing quotas, an OBC organisation said Thursday that it would challenge the decision in the court. The Maharashtra legislature has unanimously passed a bill granting 16 per cent quota in education and government jobs to the Maratha community. "The quota for Marathas will surely affect the existing OBC reservation. So we have decided to approach the court," said J D Tandel, vice president of Panvel-Uran Aagri Samaj Mandal and OBC Sangharsh Samanvay Samiti. The ruling BJP will have to pay a heavy price for this decision in coming elections, he claimed. Another OBC leader demanded that the government conduct a caste-wise census in the state. "How can we believe that there are 30 per cent Marathas in the state? The number is definitely less than that, so the government should conduct a caste-wise census," said Bhushan Bare of the Kunbi Samaj Unnati Sangh.

OBC outfit to challenge Maratha reservation in court

A court here Wednesday directed Indian pacer Mohammed Shami to appear before it on January 15 in connection with a complaint of cheque bounce filed by his wife, with whom he is embroiled in a marital dispute case.

Alipore Judicial Magistrate Md Zafar Parwej, in-charge of the chief judicial magistrate court on this day, said that failure to appear personally may invite a warrant of arrest against Shami.

His wife Hasin Jahan filed the case under NI Act after the cricketer had allegedly stopped payment of a cheque which he had given to her for monthly expenses after a marital dispute arose between the two, following which they were residing separately.

The CJM had directed Shami to appear before the court on Wednesday after he had failed to appear on an earlier date in October.

But the cricketer was not present in the court on Wednesday too.

His lawyer Sk Salim Rahaman pleaded before judge Parwej that Shami be allowed to appear through the counsel.

The judge, however, said that the law was the same for everyone and directed Shami to appear personally on January 15, 2019.

The court said that failure on the part of Shami to appear before the court on the said date may invite issuance of arrest warrant against him.

A court here Wednesday directed Indian pacer Mohammed Shami to appear before it on January 15 in connection with a complaint of cheque bounce filed by his wife, with whom he is embroiled in a marital dispute case.

A court here Wednesday directed Indian pacer Mohammed Shami to appear before it on January 15 in connection with a complaint of cheque bounce filed by his wife, with whom he is embroiled in a marital dispute case. Alipore Judicial Magistrate Md Zafar Parwej, in-charge of the chief judicial magistrate court on this day, said that failure to appear personally may invite a warrant of arrest against Shami. His wife Hasin Jahan filed the case under NI Act after the cricketer had allegedly stopped payment of a cheque which he had given to her for monthly expenses after a marital dispute arose between the two, following which they were residing separately. The CJM had directed Shami to appear before the court on Wednesday after he had failed to appear on an earlier date in October. But the cricketer was not present in the court on Wednesday too. His lawyer Sk Salim Rahaman pleaded before judge Parwej that Shami be allowed to appear through the counsel. The judge, however, said that the law was the same for everyone and directed Shami to appear personally on January 15, 2019. The court said that failure on the part of Shami to appear before the court on the said date may invite issuance of arrest warrant against him.

Cheque bounce case: Cricketer Mohammed Shami summoned by Kolkata court

Paris Saint-Germain has challenged UEFA in court after a club finance panel reopened its investigation into the French champion, and can assess transfer deals for superstar forwards Neymar and Kylian Mbappe.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport said on Monday the appeal case is confidential at the request of PSG and UEFA and gave no further details.

Qatar-owned PSG has long been a target of UEFA rules designed to curb so-called financial doping by wealthy backers of clubs which qualify for the Champions League or Europa League.

The Financial Fair Play program requires clubs to approach break-even on soccer-related business, such as player trading and wages, and also assesses the fair market value of sponsorship deals.

PSG forfeited 20 million euros (USD 22.8 million) of Champions League prize money in a 2014 settlement. Then, Abu Dhabi-owned Manchester City got the same deal from UEFA in signature cases from the first round of FFP sanctions.

Details of tough 2014 negotiations between both clubs and UEFA's then-leaders were revealed at the weekend by European media. Published emails included legal threats by the clubs trying to prevent possible bans from the Champions League worth tens of millions of euros per season.

In April 2017, UEFA released PSG and Man City from their settlement deals for complying with three years of stricter monitoring.

PSG then spent heavily in that offseason, breaking soccer's transfer record to buy Neymar from Barcelona for 222 million euros (USD 253 million). A loan deal was agreed with Monaco for Mbappe that became a 180 million euros (USD 205 million) purchase this year.

UEFA opened an investigation soon after the Mbappe loan, and warned PSG in June this year to raise cash quickly from player sales to balance its 2017-18 accounts. UEFA also said some sponsor deals, including from Qatar, were overvalued.

Still, investigators for UEFA's Club Financial Control Body closed their scrutiny of PSG's accounts for the year through June 2017 before the Neymar signing.

The UEFA panel's judging chamber reviewed the decision and in September sent the case back for a "deeper investigation." It is that move which PSG is challenging at CAS.

The sports court's judges must first decide if it is admissible to appeal a procedural step rather than a final ruling.

Joining PSG in a similar situation, Galatasaray was also placed under further investigation by the UEFA panel last month. It is unclear if the Turkish club has appealed to CAS.&nbsp;

Paris Saint-Germain has challenged UEFA in court after a club finance panel reopened its investigation into the French champion, and can assess transfer deals for superstar forwards Neymar and Kylian Mbappe.

Paris Saint-Germain has challenged UEFA in court after a club finance panel reopened its investigation into the French champion, and can assess transfer deals for superstar forwards Neymar and Kylian Mbappe. The Court of Arbitration for Sport said on Monday the appeal case is confidential at the request of PSG and UEFA and gave no further details. Qatar-owned PSG has long been a target of UEFA rules designed to curb so-called financial doping by wealthy backers of clubs which qualify for the Champions League or Europa League. The Financial Fair Play program requires clubs to approach break-even on soccer-related business, such as player trading and wages, and also assesses the fair market value of sponsorship deals. PSG forfeited 20 million euros (USD 22.8 million) of Champions League prize money in a 2014 settlement. Then, Abu Dhabi-owned Manchester City got the same deal from UEFA in signature cases from the first round of FFP sanctions. Details of tough 2014 negotiations between both clubs and UEFA's then-leaders were revealed at the weekend by European media. Published emails included legal threats by the clubs trying to prevent possible bans from the Champions League worth tens of millions of euros per season. In April 2017, UEFA released PSG and Man City from their settlement deals for complying with three years of stricter monitoring. PSG then spent heavily in that offseason, breaking soccer's transfer record to buy Neymar from Barcelona for 222 million euros (USD 253 million). A loan deal was agreed with Monaco for Mbappe that became a 180 million euros (USD 205 million) purchase this year. UEFA opened an investigation soon after the Mbappe loan, and warned PSG in June this year to raise cash quickly from player sales to balance its 2017-18 accounts. UEFA also said some sponsor deals, including from Qatar, were overvalued. Still, investigators for UEFA's Club Financial Control Body closed their scrutiny of PSG's accounts for the year through June 2017 before the Neymar signing. The UEFA panel's judging chamber reviewed the decision and in September sent the case back for a "deeper investigation." It is that move which PSG is challenging at CAS. The sports court's judges must first decide if it is admissible to appeal a procedural step rather than a final ruling. Joining PSG in a similar situation, Galatasaray was also placed under further investigation by the UEFA panel last month. It is unclear if the Turkish club has appealed to CAS.

Paris Saint-Germain challenges UEFA in court

The man charged in the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre appeared in court shackled to a wheelchair on Monday as some Jewish leaders and the mayor <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/trump-not-welcome-in-pittsburgh-174314">objected to US&nbsp;President Donald Trump's planned visit to the city</a> on the first day of funerals for the victims.

Robert Bowers, the man accused of shooting 11 worshipers to death at the Tree of Life synagogue on Saturday, sat stony-faced and mostly silent before a US&nbsp;magistrate judge, who ordered him held without bond in the deadliest attack ever on America's Jewish community.

The onetime truck driver, who frequently posted anti-Semitic material online and was described by neighbors as a loner, was charged with 29 federal felony counts and could face the death penalty if convicted.

Prosecutors have said they are treating the mass shooting as a hate crime. The bloodshed heightened a national debate over Trump's inflammatory political rhetoric, which his critics say has contributed to fomenting a surge in right-wing extremism in the United States.

"Yes, words matter," Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto, a Democrat, said during a CNN interview on Monday.

Over the weekend, Trump branded Saturday's shooting an act of pure evil but also angered some by telling reporters the slaying might have been prevented had an armed guard been present at the synagogue.

The White House nevertheless said the president would visit Pittsburgh on Tuesday with first lady Melania Trump to "express the support of the American people and grieve with the Pittsburgh community."

FIRST BURIALS

The trip would come just a week before the hotly contested Nov. 6 congressional elections that will determine whether Trump's Republican Party will retain a majority in Congress.

It also will coincide with at least the first two funerals scheduled for the slain worshipers - David Rosenthal, 54, and his brother Cecil Rosenthal, 59.

The Trump administration has rejected the notion he has encouraged white nationalists and neo-Nazis who have embraced him. But a group of local Jewish leaders told Trump in an open letter on Monday he was "not welcome in Pittsburgh until you fully denounce white nationalism."

More than 27,000 people have signed the letter, organized and posted online by the Pittsburgh chapter of Bend the Arc, a Jewish organization devoted to opposing "the immoral agenda of the Trump administration and the Republican Party."

Trump drew bipartisan condemnation last year for saying "many sides" were to blame for violence that erupted during a "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, and during a torch-lit march the night before by hundreds of right-wing demonstrators chanting, "White lives matter" and "Jews will not replace us."

Peduto said he believed Trump should wait until all the funerals were held before coming to Pittsburgh. He suggested Trump's visit and the additional security measures entailed would distract from the "priority" of burying the dead.

Tree of Life Rabbi Jeffrey Myers, said, however, on ABC on Monday that the president of the United States was always welcome to visit.

Bowers, 46, is accused of storming into the synagogue in Pittsburgh's heavily Jewish Squirrel Hill section yelling, "All Jews must die" as he opened fire on members of three congregations holding Sabbath prayer services there on Saturday morning.

In addition to the 11 mostly elderly worshipers who were killed, six people, including four police officers, were wounded before the suspect was shot by police and surrendered.

Two of the surviving victims remained hospitalized in critical condition.

"Robert Bowers murdered 11 people who were exercising their religious beliefs," U.S. Attorney Scott Brady said after the Monday's arraignment, adding a grand jury would hear details of the crime within 30 days.

The judge ordered Bowers to remain in federal custody and ruled he was entitled to court-appointed counsel. His next hearing was set for Thursday.

Bowers' arraignment was marked by a heavy security presence that included police officers with dogs and a team of sharpshooters at the federal courthouse in Pittsburgh.

Wearing a blue sweatshirt, gray sweatpants, sandals and white socks, with a crewcut and bald spot, Bowers remained expressionless throughout the brief proceeding.

Bowers said nothing except to give his name, acknowledge he understood the charges against him and that he lacked funds to pay for an attorney. He spoke in a calm voice and signed the papers handed to him with a steady hand.

Only at the end of the hearing when he was wheeled out of the courtroom did Bowers appear unsettled, turning his head in apparent confusion.

According to an affidavit filed in the case by the FBI, three handguns and an AR-15 rifle were recovered at the scene.

The complaint quoted Bowers as saying to one law enforcement officer, in substance: "They're committing genocide to my people. I just want to kill Jews."

He is charged with 11 counts of obstruction of the exercise of religious beliefs resulting in death and 11 counts of using a firearm to commit murder — one count for each worshipper killed. Seven other counts of civil rights and firearms offences stem from the injury of police officers during the assault.

The man charged in the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre appeared in court shackled to a wheelchair on Monday as some Jewish leaders and the mayor objected to US President Donald Trump's planned visit to the city on the first day of funerals for the victims.

The man charged in the Pittsburgh synagogue massacre appeared in court shackled to a wheelchair on Monday as some Jewish leaders and the mayor objected to US President Donald Trump's planned visit to the city on the first day of funerals for the victims. Robert Bowers, the man accused of shooting 11 worshipers to death at the Tree of Life synagogue on Saturday, sat stony-faced and mostly silent before a US magistrate judge, who ordered him held without bond in the deadliest attack ever on America's Jewish community. The onetime truck driver, who frequently posted anti-Semitic material online and was described by neighbors as a loner, was charged with 29 federal felony counts and could face the death penalty if convicted. Prosecutors have said they are treating the mass shooting as a hate crime. The bloodshed heightened a national debate over Trump's inflammatory political rhetoric, which his critics say has contributed to fomenting a surge in right-wing extremism in the United States. "Yes, words matter," Pittsburgh Mayor Bill Peduto, a Democrat, said during a CNN interview on Monday. Over the weekend, Trump branded Saturday's shooting an act of pure evil but also angered some by telling reporters the slaying might have been prevented had an armed guard been present at the synagogue. The White House nevertheless said the president would visit Pittsburgh on Tuesday with first lady Melania Trump to "express the support of the American people and grieve with the Pittsburgh community." FIRST BURIALS The trip would come just a week before the hotly contested Nov. 6 congressional elections that will determine whether Trump's Republican Party will retain a majority in Congress. It also will coincide with at least the first two funerals scheduled for the slain worshipers - David Rosenthal, 54, and his brother Cecil Rosenthal, 59. The Trump administration has rejected the notion he has encouraged white nationalists and neo-Nazis who have embraced him. But a group of local Jewish leaders told Trump in an open letter on Monday he was "not welcome in Pittsburgh until you fully denounce white nationalism." More than 27,000 people have signed the letter, organized and posted online by the Pittsburgh chapter of Bend the Arc, a Jewish organization devoted to opposing "the immoral agenda of the Trump administration and the Republican Party." Trump drew bipartisan condemnation last year for saying "many sides" were to blame for violence that erupted during a "Unite the Right" rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, and during a torch-lit march the night before by hundreds of right-wing demonstrators chanting, "White lives matter" and "Jews will not replace us." Peduto said he believed Trump should wait until all the funerals were held before coming to Pittsburgh. He suggested Trump's visit and the additional security measures entailed would distract from the "priority" of burying the dead. Tree of Life Rabbi Jeffrey Myers, said, however, on ABC on Monday that the president of the United States was always welcome to visit. Bowers, 46, is accused of storming into the synagogue in Pittsburgh's heavily Jewish Squirrel Hill section yelling, "All Jews must die" as he opened fire on members of three congregations holding Sabbath prayer services there on Saturday morning. In addition to the 11 mostly elderly worshipers who were killed, six people, including four police officers, were wounded before the suspect was shot by police and surrendered. Two of the surviving victims remained hospitalized in critical condition. "Robert Bowers murdered 11 people who were exercising their religious beliefs," U.S. Attorney Scott Brady said after the Monday's arraignment, adding a grand jury would hear details of the crime within 30 days. The judge ordered Bowers to remain in federal custody and ruled he was entitled to court-appointed counsel. His next hearing was set for Thursday. Bowers' arraignment was marked by a heavy security presence that included police officers with dogs and a team of sharpshooters at the federal courthouse in Pittsburgh. Wearing a blue sweatshirt, gray sweatpants, sandals and white socks, with a crewcut and bald spot, Bowers remained expressionless throughout the brief proceeding. Bowers said nothing except to give his name, acknowledge he understood the charges against him and that he lacked funds to pay for an attorney. He spoke in a calm voice and signed the papers handed to him with a steady hand. Only at the end of the hearing when he was wheeled out of the courtroom did Bowers appear unsettled, turning his head in apparent confusion. According to an affidavit filed in the case by the FBI, three handguns and an AR-15 rifle were recovered at the scene. The complaint quoted Bowers as saying to one law enforcement officer, in substance: "They're committing genocide to my people. I just want to kill Jews." He is charged with 11 counts of obstruction of the exercise of religious beliefs resulting in death and 11 counts of using a firearm to commit murder — one count for each worshipper killed. Seven other counts of civil rights and firearms offences stem from the injury of police officers during the assault.

Synagogue massacre suspect appears in court; Trump to visit grieving Pittsburgh

A complaint was lodged at a Sitamarhi court on Thursday against Union minister Smriti Irani for her alleged remarks on allowing women of menstruating age into the Sabarimala temple in Kerala.

A controversy had erupted after Irani said at an event in Mumbai Tuesday that women had a right to pray but "not desecrate" places of worship.

Hours later, she tweeted that she made "2 factual statements" and "rest of the propaganda/agenda" was launched using her as a "bait".

The complaint was lodged before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi, Saroj Kumari by advocate Thakur Chandan Singh.

Thakur Chandan Singh has made protesters against entry of women into the shrine as party in the case.<iframe data-load-complete="true" frameborder="0" height="1" id="google_ads_iframe_/1068322/NDTV_News_ROS_Native_Outstream_0" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" name="google_ads_iframe_/1068322/NDTV_News_ROS_Native_Outstream_0" scrolling="no" srcdoc="" title="3rd party ad content" width="1"></iframe>

On September 28, the Supreme Court lifted the ban on entry of women of menstrual age into the Sabarimala temple. However, women were stopped by protesters from climbing up the hill top shrine.

The complaint has been lodged under Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy to commit offence punishable with death), 124A (sedition), 353 (deterring public servant from discharge of duty) and 354 (outraging the modesty of a woman) of the Indian Penal Code.

The matter is likely to come up for hearing on October 29.&nbsp;

A complaint was lodged at a Sitamarhi court on Thursday against Union minister Smriti Irani for her alleged remarks on allowing women of menstruating age into the Sabarimala temple in Kerala.

A complaint was lodged at a Sitamarhi court on Thursday against Union minister Smriti Irani for her alleged remarks on allowing women of menstruating age into the Sabarimala temple in Kerala. A controversy had erupted after Irani said at an event in Mumbai Tuesday that women had a right to pray but "not desecrate" places of worship. Hours later, she tweeted that she made "2 factual statements" and "rest of the propaganda/agenda" was launched using her as a "bait". The complaint was lodged before the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sitamarhi, Saroj Kumari by advocate Thakur Chandan Singh. Thakur Chandan Singh has made protesters against entry of women into the shrine as party in the case. On September 28, the Supreme Court lifted the ban on entry of women of menstrual age into the Sabarimala temple. However, women were stopped by protesters from climbing up the hill top shrine. The complaint has been lodged under Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy to commit offence punishable with death), 124A (sedition), 353 (deterring public servant from discharge of duty) and 354 (outraging the modesty of a woman) of the Indian Penal Code. The matter is likely to come up for hearing on October 29.

Complaint against Smriti Irani in Bihar court over sanitary napkin remark

The Thoothukudi Magistrate Court on Thursday ordered police officials to register a case against Tamil Nadu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) President Dr. Tamilisai Soundararajan, for allegedly abusing a co-passenger, Lois Sophia, who recently raised anti-party slogans on an aircraft.

The court ordered the police to register a case under Sections 341, 294(b) and 506(1) under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), after Sophia's father had approached the court, alleging that Soundararajan and her party workers had reportedly used abusive language against his daughter and misbehaved with her.

On September 3, Sophia allegedly raised 'Fascist BJP Government down down' slogan on a Chennai-Tuticorin flight. Enraged by the same, Soundararajan, also on the same aircraft, got into a verbal spat with the co-passenger and later allegedly with the police, who were stationed at the Tuticorin airport.

Soundararajan also lodged a complaint and Sophia was later detained for interrogation. However, the police released the girl on unconditional bail.

The Tamil Nadu BJP president claimed that the girl belonged to some organisation and was tutored to misbehave with the BJP leaders.

"It is the duty of the media to find out the name of the organisation that she belongs to. No normal passenger sitting in the flight have the audacity to misbehave with the leaders like that. I am sure this move was tutored," she had said last month.

The Thoothukudi Magistrate Court on Thursday ordered police officials to register a case against Tamil Nadu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) President Dr. Tamilisai Soundararajan, for allegedly abusing a co-passenger, Lois Sophia, who recently raised anti-party slogans on an aircraft.

The Thoothukudi Magistrate Court on Thursday ordered police officials to register a case against Tamil Nadu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) President Dr. Tamilisai Soundararajan, for allegedly abusing a co-passenger, Lois Sophia, who recently raised anti-party slogans on an aircraft. The court ordered the police to register a case under Sections 341, 294(b) and 506(1) under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), after Sophia's father had approached the court, alleging that Soundararajan and her party workers had reportedly used abusive language against his daughter and misbehaved with her. On September 3, Sophia allegedly raised 'Fascist BJP Government down down' slogan on a Chennai-Tuticorin flight. Enraged by the same, Soundararajan, also on the same aircraft, got into a verbal spat with the co-passenger and later allegedly with the police, who were stationed at the Tuticorin airport. Soundararajan also lodged a complaint and Sophia was later detained for interrogation. However, the police released the girl on unconditional bail. The Tamil Nadu BJP president claimed that the girl belonged to some organisation and was tutored to misbehave with the BJP leaders. "It is the duty of the media to find out the name of the organisation that she belongs to. No normal passenger sitting in the flight have the audacity to misbehave with the leaders like that. I am sure this move was tutored," she had said last month.

Court orders FIR against Tamil Nadu BJP chief Tamilisai Soundararajan

Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Deputy SP Devender Kumar has been sent to 7 days CBI custody.

CBI on Tuesday produced before a Delhi court its DSP Devender Kumar, arrested in connection with bribery allegations involving agency's Special Director Rakesh Asthana.

The investigating agency sought his custody for 10 days and told Special CBI Judge Santosh Snehi Mann that incriminating documents and evidence found after raiding his office and residence.

It claimed that Kumar was part of extortion racket being run in the garb of investigation.

Kumar's counsel opposed the submission and moved a bail plea before the court. The hearing in the case is underway.

CBI has sought the court's nod to add some more sections in the present FIR against accused including Kumar.

The present case is an effort to derail the probe in a separate case lodged against meat exporter Moin Qureshi, the arrested CBI official alleged in the court.

The special court has reserved its order on the CBI plea till 4 PM. Kumar was arrested yesterday

Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Deputy SP Devender Kumar has been sent to 7 days CBI custody. CBI on Tuesday produced before a Delhi court its DSP Devender Kumar, arrested in connection with bribery allegations involving agency's Special Director Rakesh Asthana.

Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Deputy SP Devender Kumar has been sent to 7 days CBI custody. CBI on Tuesday produced before a Delhi court its DSP Devender Kumar, arrested in connection with bribery allegations involving agency's Special Director Rakesh Asthana. The investigating agency sought his custody for 10 days and told Special CBI Judge Santosh Snehi Mann that incriminating documents and evidence found after raiding his office and residence. It claimed that Kumar was part of extortion racket being run in the garb of investigation. Kumar's counsel opposed the submission and moved a bail plea before the court. The hearing in the case is underway. CBI has sought the court's nod to add some more sections in the present FIR against accused including Kumar. The present case is an effort to derail the probe in a separate case lodged against meat exporter Moin Qureshi, the arrested CBI official alleged in the court. The special court has reserved its order on the CBI plea till 4 PM. Kumar was arrested yesterday

CBI Deputy SP Devender Kumar remanded in CBI custody for 7 days

An American student who was barred from entering Israel under a law against foreign activists who support boycotts of the state over its Palestinian policies was given permission to stay in the country by the Supreme Court on Thursday.

In its ruling, the court criticised Israeli authorities for denying entry to Lara Alqasem, 22, saying their decision gave "the unavoidable impression" that she was barred for her political opinions.

If so, the justices said, it represented "a radical and dangerous step that could lead to the crumbling of the foundations upon which Israel's democracy is built".

Alqasem was refused entry when she flew to Israel on a study visa on Oct. 2. Security officials cited her role as president of a small local chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida.

Her case touched off a debate in Israel over whether democratic values had been compromised by a 2017 law that bars the entry of foreigners who publicly support boycotts over Israel's policies towards the Palestinians.

Thursday's ruling, seen by Reuters, overturned a lower court decision that had backed the decision by Israeli authorities.

Alqasem said she was releived by the court's decision and would speak more later. Her lawyers called the ruling "a victory for free speech, academic freedom, and the rule of law".

Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan, who had denied Alqasem entry, said the government would look into the implications of the ruling.

"We will examine the legal criteria in order to ensure that the original intent of the law is maintained," he said. "The principle that whoever acts to harm the State of Israel and its citizens should be refused entry must be preserved."

Members of Israel's right-wing government have long criticized the court for being, in their eyes, too liberal in its interventions regarding policy towards Palestinians.

The Supreme Court accepted Alqasem's lawyers’ argument that she had ceased her pro-boycott activity in April 2017, and noted that since then she had engaged in Holocaust studies and had been accepted to a post graduate programme at Jerusalem’s Hebrew University, which supported her petition.

"Since the petitioner's actions do not sufficiently warrant banning her entry to Israel, the unavoidable impression is that her political opinions were the reason behind the cancellation of the visa that was granted to her," the ruling said.

"If that is indeed the case, we are talking about a radical and dangerous step."

The court cited in its decision the Hebrew University's contention that barring the entry, at the airport, of a foreign student accepted into an international programme damaged the university's international ties.

However one justice wrote that if Alqasem "returns to her old ways" and promoted a boycott while she is in Israel, her stay could be cancelled and she could be expelled.

It was not immediately clear whether the Israeli authorities would appeal the ruling.

An American student who was barred from entering Israel under a law against foreign activists who support boycotts of the state over its Palestinian policies was given permission to stay in the country by the Supreme Court on Thursday.

An American student who was barred from entering Israel under a law against foreign activists who support boycotts of the state over its Palestinian policies was given permission to stay in the country by the Supreme Court on Thursday. In its ruling, the court criticised Israeli authorities for denying entry to Lara Alqasem, 22, saying their decision gave "the unavoidable impression" that she was barred for her political opinions. If so, the justices said, it represented "a radical and dangerous step that could lead to the crumbling of the foundations upon which Israel's democracy is built". Alqasem was refused entry when she flew to Israel on a study visa on Oct. 2. Security officials cited her role as president of a small local chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Florida. Her case touched off a debate in Israel over whether democratic values had been compromised by a 2017 law that bars the entry of foreigners who publicly support boycotts over Israel's policies towards the Palestinians. Thursday's ruling, seen by Reuters, overturned a lower court decision that had backed the decision by Israeli authorities. Alqasem said she was releived by the court's decision and would speak more later. Her lawyers called the ruling "a victory for free speech, academic freedom, and the rule of law". Public Security Minister Gilad Erdan, who had denied Alqasem entry, said the government would look into the implications of the ruling. "We will examine the legal criteria in order to ensure that the original intent of the law is maintained," he said. "The principle that whoever acts to harm the State of Israel and its citizens should be refused entry must be preserved." Members of Israel's right-wing government have long criticized the court for being, in their eyes, too liberal in its interventions regarding policy towards Palestinians. The Supreme Court accepted Alqasem's lawyers’ argument that she had ceased her pro-boycott activity in April 2017, and noted that since then she had engaged in Holocaust studies and had been accepted to a post graduate programme at Jerusalem’s Hebrew University, which supported her petition. "Since the petitioner's actions do not sufficiently warrant banning her entry to Israel, the unavoidable impression is that her political opinions were the reason behind the cancellation of the visa that was granted to her," the ruling said. "If that is indeed the case, we are talking about a radical and dangerous step." The court cited in its decision the Hebrew University's contention that barring the entry, at the airport, of a foreign student accepted into an international programme damaged the university's international ties. However one justice wrote that if Alqasem "returns to her old ways" and promoted a boycott while she is in Israel, her stay could be cancelled and she could be expelled. It was not immediately clear whether the Israeli authorities would appeal the ruling.

US student in boycott case allowed to stay in Israel

The Maldives' top court rejected on Tuesday three "secret" witnesses offered by President Abdulla Yameen in his petition to have his September election defeat annulled, in what is likely a major blow to his case.

The refusal came as the Supreme Court concluded its hearings, which also saw Yameen allege disappearing ink was used on ballot papers, and said it would deliver its verdict at an unspecified later date.

Lawyers for Yameen, who was beaten in the election despite all his main rivals being in prison or in exile, had said the three unnamed witnesses would reveal how the vote was rigged.

The country's independent Elections Commission (EC) through its lawyers argued Yameen's petition was based on false allegations and should be dismissed.

Local media also reported four of the five election commissioners have fled the country and sought refuge in neighbouring Sri Lanka following death threats after Yameen lost the election.

Despite Yameen's main competitors being out of the way and the media in his pocket, he was beaten by Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, the joint candidate of the beleaguered opposition.

Under pressure from abroad, Yameen initially conceded defeat and said he would stand down on November 17, but then last week filed his petition -- and despite the threat of sanctions.

Yameen's lawyer Mohamed Saleem told the court that the printer of ballot papers of coating them with an unnamed substance that made votes marked in Yameen's box disappear.

Saleem said a "special pen with disappearing ink" was also given to people who were going to vote for his client.&nbsp;

Counting officials also allegedly carried secret pens, in the form of rings on their fingers, which they used to mark ballots for the opposition.

Opposition lawyer Hisan Hussain said the entire challenge was based on "pure conspiracy theories".

"Pen rings and disappearing ink are fanciful. The only thing missing from the case are magic carpets," she told reporters after the hearing concluded.

She insisted that Yameen had not presented any "real evidence" to back his claims of vote rigging and fraud.

Ahead of the court hearing in the capital Male, the United States had warned "appropriat measures" would be taken if the will of the Maldivian people was undermined.

Europe and India have also issued similar warnings in the past.

The US and its allies have been concerned by growing Chinese influence in the strategically positioned Indian Ocean archipelago, especially under Yameen's authoritarian rule.

The Maldives' top court rejected on Tuesday three "secret" witnesses offered by President Abdulla Yameen in his petition to have his September election defeat annulled, in what is likely a major blow to his case.

The Maldives' top court rejected on Tuesday three "secret" witnesses offered by President Abdulla Yameen in his petition to have his September election defeat annulled, in what is likely a major blow to his case. The refusal came as the Supreme Court concluded its hearings, which also saw Yameen allege disappearing ink was used on ballot papers, and said it would deliver its verdict at an unspecified later date. Lawyers for Yameen, who was beaten in the election despite all his main rivals being in prison or in exile, had said the three unnamed witnesses would reveal how the vote was rigged. The country's independent Elections Commission (EC) through its lawyers argued Yameen's petition was based on false allegations and should be dismissed. Local media also reported four of the five election commissioners have fled the country and sought refuge in neighbouring Sri Lanka following death threats after Yameen lost the election. Despite Yameen's main competitors being out of the way and the media in his pocket, he was beaten by Ibrahim Mohamed Solih, the joint candidate of the beleaguered opposition. Under pressure from abroad, Yameen initially conceded defeat and said he would stand down on November 17, but then last week filed his petition -- and despite the threat of sanctions. Yameen's lawyer Mohamed Saleem told the court that the printer of ballot papers of coating them with an unnamed substance that made votes marked in Yameen's box disappear. Saleem said a "special pen with disappearing ink" was also given to people who were going to vote for his client. Counting officials also allegedly carried secret pens, in the form of rings on their fingers, which they used to mark ballots for the opposition. Opposition lawyer Hisan Hussain said the entire challenge was based on "pure conspiracy theories". "Pen rings and disappearing ink are fanciful. The only thing missing from the case are magic carpets," she told reporters after the hearing concluded. She insisted that Yameen had not presented any "real evidence" to back his claims of vote rigging and fraud. Ahead of the court hearing in the capital Male, the United States had warned "appropriat measures" would be taken if the will of the Maldivian people was undermined. Europe and India have also issued similar warnings in the past. The US and its allies have been concerned by growing Chinese influence in the strategically positioned Indian Ocean archipelago, especially under Yameen's authoritarian rule.

Maldives court rejects Yameen's secret witnesses

A Pakistani court on Tuesday extended the remand of PML-N chief and opposition leader Shahbaz Sharif by 14 days in the Rs 1,400 crore housing scam.&nbsp;

Shahbaz, 67, the younger brother of ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif, was arrested by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on October 5 in the Ashiana-e-Iqbal housing project scam. He was remanded to a 10-day custody to NAB.

The former Punjab chief minister was brought to the accountability court amid high security. A large number of PML-N workers were also present at the court premises.

He told the accountability court judge Najamul Hasan that he had committed no illegality in the award of the contract (in the housing project).

He also said the NAB was unable find any evidence against him during his 10-day remand.

Shahbaz asked why the NAB wanted extension of his remand when he was fully cooperating.

"No NAB official investigated me in the last three days," he said, adding that his government had followed the legal procedure in award of contract the housing project.&nbsp;

"I have served the country and saved billions of rupees in different development projects during my tenure as chief minister (2008-2018)," he said.

Shahbaz's counsel opposed the extension of his remand, saying the NAB has failed to present any proof of his involvement in the scam.

"Therefore the NAB's plea for further extension to his client's remand be dismissed," he said, adding that the case against Shahbaz had been instituted on "political grounds" as he had not issued any illegal orders being the chief minister.

The NAB prosecutor requested the court to grant extend Shahbaz's remand, which was accepted.&nbsp;

The court remanded Shahbaz into NAB's custody for another 14 days (till October 30).

Shahbaz is accused of ordering the cancellation of a contract given to successful bidder Chaudhry Latif and Sons in the Ashiana housing in order to oblige his 'favourite fir' - Lahore Casa Developers, resulting in a loss of Rs 193 million to the exchequer.

He is also accused of directing the Punjab Land Development Company (PLDC) to award the consultancy services of the Ashiana project to Engineering

Consultancy Services Punjab (ECSP) for Rs 192 million while the actual cost was supposed to be Rs 35 million as quoted by Nespak.

Nawaz Sharif has termed his brother's arrest as political victimisation. "Shahbaz Sharif being the chief minister of Punjab had set great examples of transparency and honesty in all projects. The Imran Khan's government is responsible for this political victimization."

Meanwhile, NAB may take Shahbaz to Islamabad on Wednesday to take part in the National Assembly session. The NA Speaker has already issued production order of Shahbaz, directing the NAB to allow him to take part in the parliament session.

A Pakistani court on Tuesday extended the remand of PML-N chief and opposition leader Shahbaz Sharif by 14 days in the Rs 1,400 crore housing scam. Shahbaz, 67, the younger brother of ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif, was arrested by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on October 5 in the Ashiana-e-Iqbal housing project scam.

A Pakistani court on Tuesday extended the remand of PML-N chief and opposition leader Shahbaz Sharif by 14 days in the Rs 1,400 crore housing scam. Shahbaz, 67, the younger brother of ousted prime minister Nawaz Sharif, was arrested by the National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on October 5 in the Ashiana-e-Iqbal housing project scam. He was remanded to a 10-day custody to NAB. The former Punjab chief minister was brought to the accountability court amid high security. A large number of PML-N workers were also present at the court premises. He told the accountability court judge Najamul Hasan that he had committed no illegality in the award of the contract (in the housing project). He also said the NAB was unable find any evidence against him during his 10-day remand. Shahbaz asked why the NAB wanted extension of his remand when he was fully cooperating. "No NAB official investigated me in the last three days," he said, adding that his government had followed the legal procedure in award of contract the housing project. "I have served the country and saved billions of rupees in different development projects during my tenure as chief minister (2008-2018)," he said. Shahbaz's counsel opposed the extension of his remand, saying the NAB has failed to present any proof of his involvement in the scam. "Therefore the NAB's plea for further extension to his client's remand be dismissed," he said, adding that the case against Shahbaz had been instituted on "political grounds" as he had not issued any illegal orders being the chief minister. The NAB prosecutor requested the court to grant extend Shahbaz's remand, which was accepted. The court remanded Shahbaz into NAB's custody for another 14 days (till October 30). Shahbaz is accused of ordering the cancellation of a contract given to successful bidder Chaudhry Latif and Sons in the Ashiana housing in order to oblige his 'favourite fir' - Lahore Casa Developers, resulting in a loss of Rs 193 million to the exchequer. He is also accused of directing the Punjab Land Development Company (PLDC) to award the consultancy services of the Ashiana project to Engineering Consultancy Services Punjab (ECSP) for Rs 192 million while the actual cost was supposed to be Rs 35 million as quoted by Nespak. Nawaz Sharif has termed his brother's arrest as political victimisation. "Shahbaz Sharif being the chief minister of Punjab had set great examples of transparency and honesty in all projects. The Imran Khan's government is responsible for this political victimization." Meanwhile, NAB may take Shahbaz to Islamabad on Wednesday to take part in the National Assembly session. The NA Speaker has already issued production order of Shahbaz, directing the NAB to allow him to take part in the parliament session.

Court extends Shahbaz's remand by 14 days in Rs 1,400 crore housing scam

A Kerala court today extended the judicial custody of Roman Catholic Bishop Franco Mulakkal, arrested over allegations of repeatedly raping and sexually assaulting a nun, by 14 days.

The magistrate's court in Pala in Kottayam district remanded the bishop to judicial custody till October 20.

The 54-year-old clergyman was produced before the court after the period of his judicial custody ended today.

Sources said the lawyers of the bishop were planning to approach the Kerala High Court once again, seeking bail.

The high court had dismissed Mulakkal's bail plea on Wednesday, while accepting the prosecution's argument that the accused, holding a high position in the society, would try to influence the witnesses in the case if he was granted bail.

The police had said the investigation in the case was progressing even after the arrest of the accused.

The bishop is currently lodged in a sub-jail in Pala.

In her complaint to the Kottayam Police in June, the nun had alleged that Bishop Mulakkal had raped her at a guest house in Kuravilangad in May, 2014 and subsequently, sexually exploited her on several occasions.

The nun had said she had to approach the police as the church authorities did not act on her repeated complaints against the clergyman.

However, the bishop has denied the charges.

A Kerala court today extended the judicial custody of Roman Catholic Bishop Franco Mulakkal, arrested over allegations of repeatedly raping and sexually assaulting a nun, by 14 days.

A Kerala court today extended the judicial custody of Roman Catholic Bishop Franco Mulakkal, arrested over allegations of repeatedly raping and sexually assaulting a nun, by 14 days. The magistrate's court in Pala in Kottayam district remanded the bishop to judicial custody till October 20. The 54-year-old clergyman was produced before the court after the period of his judicial custody ended today. Sources said the lawyers of the bishop were planning to approach the Kerala High Court once again, seeking bail. The high court had dismissed Mulakkal's bail plea on Wednesday, while accepting the prosecution's argument that the accused, holding a high position in the society, would try to influence the witnesses in the case if he was granted bail. The police had said the investigation in the case was progressing even after the arrest of the accused. The bishop is currently lodged in a sub-jail in Pala. In her complaint to the Kottayam Police in June, the nun had alleged that Bishop Mulakkal had raped her at a guest house in Kuravilangad in May, 2014 and subsequently, sexually exploited her on several occasions. The nun had said she had to approach the police as the church authorities did not act on her repeated complaints against the clergyman. However, the bishop has denied the charges.

Rape accused Bishop's judicial custody extended by 14 days

Pakistan's deposed prime minister Nawaz Sharif on Tuesday appeared before an anti-corruption court hearing graft cases against him, in his first court appearance after getting bail last month in a major corruption case that wrecked his political career.

Sharif appeared before the accountability court after Judge Muhammad Arshad Malik on Monday warned that he may cancel his surety bond and issue arrest warrants if the former premier failed to appear before the bench.

After a brief hearing, the court adjourned hearing of Al-Azizia and Hill Metal corruption case against Sharif till Wednesday, Radio Pakistan reported.

On the orders of the Supreme Court, the National Accountability Bureau had filed three corruption cases against the 68-year-old three-time former prime minister.

A top Pakistani court last month suspended the jail sentences of Sharif, his daughter and son-in-law in the Avenfield corruption case, one of the three corruption cases. The trio were released from a jail following the court order.

Apart from the Avenfield case, the Sharifs face jail terms if they are convicted in two more corruption cases related to the Al-Azizia and the Flagship Investment cases.

The cases against the family stemmed from the Panama Papers case in April 2016.

The Flagship Investment Ltd case is based on information the NAB had obtained from the report filed by the Joint Investigation Team constituted by the

Supreme Court to probe money laundering allegations against Sharif and his family.

The court had summoned Panamagate joint investigation team head and prosecution's star witness Wajid Zia to record his statement on Monday.

However, Zia's statement could not be recorded as the former premier and his counsel did not appear for the hearing.

Expressing anger over their absence, Judge Malik on Monday remarked, "A suspect cannot skip a hearing on his own will."

The judge was further irked when defence counsel Khawaja Haris requested, through his associate Munawwar Iqbal Duggal, for a two-day adjournment of

Flagship, Al Aziziya and Hill Metal Establishment case hearings, owing to health issues.

When the judge inquired about Sharif's absence, Duggal said that the accused was supposed to appear and sought time to find out why the former prime minister did not turn up.&nbsp;

"Neither the suspect nor the counsel are present. Am I supposed to wait all day?" Judge Malik asked. "I adjourned hearings of other cases to hear yours, please tell me what you all want," he further said.

He added, "I will write down an order and then you all keep challenging it."

To this, the deputy counsel said he is trying to contact Sharif and asked for a few minutes to update the court.

Later Duggal told the court that the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) supremo did not appear owing to "genuine confusion".&nbsp;

Sharif and his sons, Hussain and Hasan, are accused in all three corruption cases whereas his daughter Maryam and her husband Capt (retd)

Muhammad Safdar were accused in the Avenfield case only.

The two brothers, based in London, have been declared as proclaimed offenders by the court.

Pakistan's deposed prime minister Nawaz Sharif on Tuesday appeared before an anti-corruption court hearing graft cases against him, in his first court appearance after getting bail last month in a major corruption case that wrecked his political career.

Pakistan's deposed prime minister Nawaz Sharif on Tuesday appeared before an anti-corruption court hearing graft cases against him, in his first court appearance after getting bail last month in a major corruption case that wrecked his political career. Sharif appeared before the accountability court after Judge Muhammad Arshad Malik on Monday warned that he may cancel his surety bond and issue arrest warrants if the former premier failed to appear before the bench. After a brief hearing, the court adjourned hearing of Al-Azizia and Hill Metal corruption case against Sharif till Wednesday, Radio Pakistan reported. On the orders of the Supreme Court, the National Accountability Bureau had filed three corruption cases against the 68-year-old three-time former prime minister. A top Pakistani court last month suspended the jail sentences of Sharif, his daughter and son-in-law in the Avenfield corruption case, one of the three corruption cases. The trio were released from a jail following the court order. Apart from the Avenfield case, the Sharifs face jail terms if they are convicted in two more corruption cases related to the Al-Azizia and the Flagship Investment cases. The cases against the family stemmed from the Panama Papers case in April 2016. The Flagship Investment Ltd case is based on information the NAB had obtained from the report filed by the Joint Investigation Team constituted by the Supreme Court to probe money laundering allegations against Sharif and his family. The court had summoned Panamagate joint investigation team head and prosecution's star witness Wajid Zia to record his statement on Monday. However, Zia's statement could not be recorded as the former premier and his counsel did not appear for the hearing. Expressing anger over their absence, Judge Malik on Monday remarked, "A suspect cannot skip a hearing on his own will." The judge was further irked when defence counsel Khawaja Haris requested, through his associate Munawwar Iqbal Duggal, for a two-day adjournment of Flagship, Al Aziziya and Hill Metal Establishment case hearings, owing to health issues. When the judge inquired about Sharif's absence, Duggal said that the accused was supposed to appear and sought time to find out why the former prime minister did not turn up. "Neither the suspect nor the counsel are present. Am I supposed to wait all day?" Judge Malik asked. "I adjourned hearings of other cases to hear yours, please tell me what you all want," he further said. He added, "I will write down an order and then you all keep challenging it." To this, the deputy counsel said he is trying to contact Sharif and asked for a few minutes to update the court. Later Duggal told the court that the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz (PML-N) supremo did not appear owing to "genuine confusion". Sharif and his sons, Hussain and Hasan, are accused in all three corruption cases whereas his daughter Maryam and her husband Capt (retd) Muhammad Safdar were accused in the Avenfield case only. The two brothers, based in London, have been declared as proclaimed offenders by the court.

Nawaz Sharif appears before Pakistan anti-corruption court

The Delhi High Court has extended the interim protection of former Finance minister P. Chidambaram in connection with the INX media case. He has been granted interim protection from arrest until October 25.

On August 1, the court had extended his interim protection from arrest till September 28.

An anticipatory bail plea was filed by Chidambaram seeking protection from arrest by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

Chidambaram and his son, Karti, have been under the scanner of the CBI and ED in connection with the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance granted to INX Media, a venture promoted by former media baron Peter Mukerjea and his wife, Indrani Mukerjea.

The alleged irregularities took place in 2007 when Chidambaram was the Finance minister under the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government.

In February, Karti was arrested for his alleged role in the case. The court, however, granted him bail in March.

The Delhi High Court has extended the interim protection of former Finance minister P. Chidambaram in connection with the INX media case. He has been granted interim protection from arrest until October 25.

The Delhi High Court has extended the interim protection of former Finance minister P. Chidambaram in connection with the INX media case. He has been granted interim protection from arrest until October 25. On August 1, the court had extended his interim protection from arrest till September 28. An anticipatory bail plea was filed by Chidambaram seeking protection from arrest by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED). Chidambaram and his son, Karti, have been under the scanner of the CBI and ED in connection with the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) clearance granted to INX Media, a venture promoted by former media baron Peter Mukerjea and his wife, Indrani Mukerjea. The alleged irregularities took place in 2007 when Chidambaram was the Finance minister under the United Progressive Alliance (UPA) government. In February, Karti was arrested for his alleged role in the case. The court, however, granted him bail in March.

INX media: Court extends interim protection to Chidambaram

The Supreme Court Tuesday dismissed a plea seeking to ban lawmakers from practising as advocates.

A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said that the Bar Council of India Rules do not prohibit legislators from practising as lawyers.

The court was hearing a PIL filed by BJP leader and advocate Ashwini Upadhyay seeking to bar lawyer-lawmakers (MPs, MLAs, MLCs) from practising in courts during their tenure in legislature.

The Supreme Court Tuesday dismissed a plea seeking to ban lawmakers from practising as advocates. A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said that the Bar Council of India Rules do not prohibit legislators from practising as lawyers.

The Supreme Court Tuesday dismissed a plea seeking to ban lawmakers from practising as advocates. A bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said that the Bar Council of India Rules do not prohibit legislators from practising as lawyers. The court was hearing a PIL filed by BJP leader and advocate Ashwini Upadhyay seeking to bar lawyer-lawmakers (MPs, MLAs, MLCs) from practising in courts during their tenure in legislature.

Lawyers elected as lawmakers can practice in courts: Supreme Court

Former Finance Minister P Chidambaram has been granted protection from arrest in corruption cases relating to the Aircel Maxis deal, in which he has been asked by probe agencies to join investigations. 
&nbsp; 
There won't be any arrest till 10 July.

Meanwhile, the ED has sought time to file a detailed reply in the case. The court has fixed the matter for further hearing on July 10, the same date on which the hearing against Karti Chidambaram in Aircel-Maxis case is scheduled.

This is the second time the former finance minister has got relief from arrest.

On May 30 too, the court had allowed Chidambaram protection from arrest till June 5 in the case, after he had filed an anticipatory bail plea.

The Aircel-Maxis deal case, which emerged out of 2G spectrum cases, pertains to a grant by the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) to firm M/S Global Communication Holding Services Ltd for investment in Aircel.

The ED had said that the FIPB approval granted in 2006 by Chidambaram was beyond his mandate as he was only authorised to accord approval on project proposals up to Rs 600 crore.

P Chidambaram's son Karti was arrested on February 28 at the Chennai airport upon his return from the United Kingdom, for his alleged role in the case. Currently, Karti is on bail too.

(With inputs from ANI)

Chidambaram’s son Karti Chidambaram was also arrested in the matter for allegedly receiving funds to the tune of Rs 10 lakh in the case.

Former Finance Minister P Chidambaram has been granted protection from arrest in corruption cases relating to the Aircel Maxis deal, in which he has been asked by probe agencies to join investigations. There won't be any arrest till 10 July. Meanwhile, the ED has sought time to file a detailed reply in the case. The court has fixed the matter for further hearing on July 10, the same date on which the hearing against Karti Chidambaram in Aircel-Maxis case is scheduled. This is the second time the former finance minister has got relief from arrest. On May 30 too, the court had allowed Chidambaram protection from arrest till June 5 in the case, after he had filed an anticipatory bail plea. The Aircel-Maxis deal case, which emerged out of 2G spectrum cases, pertains to a grant by the Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) to firm M/S Global Communication Holding Services Ltd for investment in Aircel. The ED had said that the FIPB approval granted in 2006 by Chidambaram was beyond his mandate as he was only authorised to accord approval on project proposals up to Rs 600 crore. P Chidambaram's son Karti was arrested on February 28 at the Chennai airport upon his return from the United Kingdom, for his alleged role in the case. Currently, Karti is on bail too. (With inputs from ANI)

Aircel-Maxis case: Court gives Chidambaram protection from arrest till July 10 

A Delhi court has asked the CBI to respond to the bail plea of journalist Upendra Rai, who is under arrest for his alleged involvement in dubious financial transactions.

Special CBI Judge Santosh Snehi Mann directed the central probe agency to respond by May 18 on Rai’s application which has claimed that no purpose will be served by keeping him in further custody.

Rai, arrested by the CBI on May 3, is currently in the judicial custody.

The Delhi-based scribe was arrested for allegedly indulging in dubious financial transactions and getting an airport access pass made by the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS) by furnishing false information.

In his bail application, Rai has said he was not required for further custodial interrogation since the CBI’s plea for this was rejected by the court on May 9.

The Supreme Court had on May 4 refused to interfere with his arrest. In his application seeking protection from arrest, Rai had claimed he was framed in the case because of his writings against an ED officer who was part of the team probing the 2G spectrum allocation scam case.

Prasun Roy, chief security officer of Air One Aviation Pvt Ltd, was also booked by the CBI in the case. The probe agency had carried out searches at eight locations in Lucknow, Noida, Delhi and Mumbai.

In its FIR, the agency has alleged that going by the value of the transactions of over Rs one lakh during 2017, Rai’s accounts received Rs 79 crore while Rs 78.51 crore was debited from it during the same period.

The Delhi-based scribe was arrested for allegedly indulging in dubious financial transactions and getting an airport access pass made by the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS) by furnishing false information.

A Delhi court has asked the CBI to respond to the bail plea of journalist Upendra Rai, who is under arrest for his alleged involvement in dubious financial transactions. Special CBI Judge Santosh Snehi Mann directed the central probe agency to respond by May 18 on Rai’s application which has claimed that no purpose will be served by keeping him in further custody. Rai, arrested by the CBI on May 3, is currently in the judicial custody. The Delhi-based scribe was arrested for allegedly indulging in dubious financial transactions and getting an airport access pass made by the Bureau of Civil Aviation Security (BCAS) by furnishing false information. In his bail application, Rai has said he was not required for further custodial interrogation since the CBI’s plea for this was rejected by the court on May 9. The Supreme Court had on May 4 refused to interfere with his arrest. In his application seeking protection from arrest, Rai had claimed he was framed in the case because of his writings against an ED officer who was part of the team probing the 2G spectrum allocation scam case. Prasun Roy, chief security officer of Air One Aviation Pvt Ltd, was also booked by the CBI in the case. The probe agency had carried out searches at eight locations in Lucknow, Noida, Delhi and Mumbai. In its FIR, the agency has alleged that going by the value of the transactions of over Rs one lakh during 2017, Rai’s accounts received Rs 79 crore while Rs 78.51 crore was debited from it during the same period.

Court seeks CBI’s response on journalist Upendra Rai’s bail plea

The Jodhpur District & Sessions Court on Monday set July 17 as the next date to hear actor Salman Khan's application challenging the trial court order sentencing him to a five-year jail term in the 1998 blackbuck poaching case.

Salman Khan reached Jodhpur on Sunday, 6 May for the hearing of his application before a sessions judge challenging the trial court order sentencing him to a five-year jail term in the 1998 blackbuck poaching case.

The application was listed for hearing on May 7&nbsp;before Jodhpur District and Sessions Judge Chandra Kumar Songara, the actor's counsel Nishant Bora said.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/BlackBuckPoachingCase?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#BlackBuckPoachingCase</a>: Actor Salman Khan arrives at Jodhpur District & Sessions Court for hearing in the case. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Rajasthan?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Rajasthan</a> <a href="https://t.co/7iHSKoYHTG">pic.twitter.com/7iHSKoYHTG</a>
— ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/993324483216801792?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 7, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Fifty-two-year-old Khan reached Jodhpur on Sunday afternoon from Mumbai by a regular flight, a police official said.

He is accompanied by his sister Alvira, bodyguard Shera and some others, he said.

Khan was driven straight from the airport to a five-star hotel, the official said.

Khan was released from the Jodhpur jail, where he spent two nights, on 7 April, after then-District and Sessions Judge Ravindra Kumar Joshi granted him bail in the case.

Fifty-two-year-old Khan reached Jodhpur on Sunday afternoon from Mumbai by a regular flight, a police official said.

The Jodhpur District & Sessions Court on Monday set July 17 as the next date to hear actor Salman Khan's application challenging the trial court order sentencing him to a five-year jail term in the 1998 blackbuck poaching case. Salman Khan reached Jodhpur on Sunday, 6 May for the hearing of his application before a sessions judge challenging the trial court order sentencing him to a five-year jail term in the 1998 blackbuck poaching case. The application was listed for hearing on May 7 before Jodhpur District and Sessions Judge Chandra Kumar Songara, the actor's counsel Nishant Bora said. #BlackBuckPoachingCase: Actor Salman Khan arrives at Jodhpur District & Sessions Court for hearing in the case. #Rajasthan pic.twitter.com/7iHSKoYHTG — ANI (@ANI) May 7, 2018 × Fifty-two-year-old Khan reached Jodhpur on Sunday afternoon from Mumbai by a regular flight, a police official said. He is accompanied by his sister Alvira, bodyguard Shera and some others, he said. Khan was driven straight from the airport to a five-star hotel, the official said. Khan was released from the Jodhpur jail, where he spent two nights, on 7 April, after then-District and Sessions Judge Ravindra Kumar Joshi granted him bail in the case.

Blackbuck poaching case: Court to hear Salman Khan's plea for suspension of sentence on July 17

District and Sessions court on Monday acquitted six persons charged with rioting and snatching at Hafed Chowk — the epicentre of violence on August 25 last year after the arrest of Dera Sacha Sauda head Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh.

Charges were pressed against the accused of rioting, snatching and instigating violence at Hafed Chowk where protests turned violent in August last year after the arrest of Dera Sacha Sauda head Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh.

According to reports, the prosecution failed to prove the charges against the accused.&nbsp;

On August 30, a case was filed under Sections 148 (rioting), 149 and 379-A (snatching) of the IPC.

The main accused, spokesperson of Dera Sacha Sauda Aditya Insan, is still reported to be at large.&nbsp;

The Dera chief was jailed in August last year after he was convicted of raping two of his women disciples.&nbsp;

After his conviction Guru Ram Rahim's followers went on a rampage in Panchkula and Sirsa, leaving 38 people dead and over 260 injured.

The Punjab and Haryana High Court had ordered the Haryana government to make arrangements at the district jail in Sunaria for the judge to pronounce the quantum of sentence.

The high court had directed that necessary arrangements be made for the security and safe transport by air of the judicial officer and two of his staff members.

(With inputs from agencies)&nbsp;

According to reports, the prosecution failed to prove the charges against the accused.

District and Sessions court on Monday acquitted six persons charged with rioting and snatching at Hafed Chowk — the epicentre of violence on August 25 last year after the arrest of Dera Sacha Sauda head Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh. Charges were pressed against the accused of rioting, snatching and instigating violence at Hafed Chowk where protests turned violent in August last year after the arrest of Dera Sacha Sauda head Gurmeet Ram Rahim Singh. According to reports, the prosecution failed to prove the charges against the accused. On August 30, a case was filed under Sections 148 (rioting), 149 and 379-A (snatching) of the IPC. The main accused, spokesperson of Dera Sacha Sauda Aditya Insan, is still reported to be at large. The Dera chief was jailed in August last year after he was convicted of raping two of his women disciples. After his conviction Guru Ram Rahim's followers went on a rampage in Panchkula and Sirsa, leaving 38 people dead and over 260 injured. The Punjab and Haryana High Court had ordered the Haryana government to make arrangements at the district jail in Sunaria for the judge to pronounce the quantum of sentence. The high court had directed that necessary arrangements be made for the security and safe transport by air of the judicial officer and two of his staff members. (With inputs from agencies)

Dera Sacha Sauda violence case: Court acquits all six charged with rioting, snatching

A driver suspected of killing <a href="http://www.wionews.com/photos/in-pics:-10-dead,-15-injured-after-van-ploughs-into-crowd-on-toronto-sidewalk-132410">10 and injuring 15 others </a>when he plowed a rental van into pedestrians in Toronto will make his first court appearance on Tuesday when details of a motive for the attack were expected to emerge.

While the worst mass killing in Canada in decades has the hallmarks of other deadly vehicle assaults by Islamic State supporters in the United States and Europe, officials said it did not represent a threat to national security.

Alex Minassian, 25, identified by police as the suspect, will appear in a Toronto court at 10 a.m. EDT (1400 GMT), Toronto police said. Charges will be made public at that time.

Watch:&nbsp<a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/kill-me-shouted-toronto-van-driver-pointing-gun-at-cop-132497">'Kill me,' shouted Toronto van driver, pointing </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/kill-me-shouted-toronto-van-driver-pointing-gun-at-cop-132497">gun</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/kill-me-shouted-toronto-van-driver-pointing-gun-at-cop-132497"> at </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/kill-me-shouted-toronto-van-driver-pointing-gun-at-cop-132497">cop</a>

Minassian, who was not previously known to authorities, attended a high school program where one classmate remembered him as "absolutely harmless."

The officer who apprehended Minassian was praised for making a peaceful arrest eve as the suspect shouted "Kill me" and claimed to have a gun.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who called the incident a "tragic and senseless attack," was to speak to reporters at 8:45 a.m. EDT (1245 GMT) in Ottawa.

Canadians mourned as the victims began to be identified on Tuesday. "We are a peaceful, tolerant, free society. The horrific violence on Toronto’s Yonge Street will strengthen rather than undermine these truths," columnist John Ibbitson wrote in the Globe and Mail national newspaper.

The attack shook the usually peaceful streets of Toronto, a multicultural city with a population of 2.8 million. The city recorded 61 murders last year.

Downtown Toronto`s iconic CN Tower, which is normally lit up in the evening, went dark on Monday evening.&nbsp

The drama started at lunchtime on a warm spring day, when the driver drove his vehicle into the crowds. The street was soon covered in blood, empty shoes and bodies.

Canada is still recovering from the shock of a highway crash in Saskatchewan earlier this month that killed 16 people on a bus carrying a junior hockey team.&nbsp

Last October eight people died in New York when a man driving a rented pickup truck mowed down pedestrians and cyclists on a bike path.

Alex Minassian, 25, identified by police as the suspect, will appear in a Toronto court at 10 a.m. EDT (1400 GMT), Toronto police said. Charges will be made public at that time

A driver suspected of killing 10 and injuring 15 others when he plowed a rental van into pedestrians in Toronto will make his first court appearance on Tuesday when details of a motive for the attack were expected to emerge. While the worst mass killing in Canada in decades has the hallmarks of other deadly vehicle assaults by Islamic State supporters in the United States and Europe, officials said it did not represent a threat to national security. Alex Minassian, 25, identified by police as the suspect, will appear in a Toronto court at 10 a.m. EDT (1400 GMT), Toronto police said. Charges will be made public at that time. Watch: 'Kill me,' shouted Toronto van driver, pointing gun at cop Minassian, who was not previously known to authorities, attended a high school program where one classmate remembered him as "absolutely harmless." The officer who apprehended Minassian was praised for making a peaceful arrest eve as the suspect shouted "Kill me" and claimed to have a gun. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who called the incident a "tragic and senseless attack," was to speak to reporters at 8:45 a.m. EDT (1245 GMT) in Ottawa. Canadians mourned as the victims began to be identified on Tuesday. "We are a peaceful, tolerant, free society. The horrific violence on Toronto’s Yonge Street will strengthen rather than undermine these truths," columnist John Ibbitson wrote in the Globe and Mail national newspaper. The attack shook the usually peaceful streets of Toronto, a multicultural city with a population of 2.8 million. The city recorded 61 murders last year. Downtown Toronto`s iconic CN Tower, which is normally lit up in the evening, went dark on Monday evening. The drama started at lunchtime on a warm spring day, when the driver drove his vehicle into the crowds. The street was soon covered in blood, empty shoes and bodies. Canada is still recovering from the shock of a highway crash in Saskatchewan earlier this month that killed 16 people on a bus carrying a junior hockey team. Last October eight people died in New York when a man driving a rented pickup truck mowed down pedestrians and cyclists on a bike path.

Toronto van attack suspect expected in court on Tuesday

A Delhi court on Monday issued a bailable warrant against AAP leader Somnath Bharti after he failed to appear before it in a domestic violence case filed against him by his wife.&nbspSpecial Judge Arvind Kumar passed the order and directed the accused to appear in court on April 27.&nbspThe Delhi High Court had on March 20 allowed Bharti to settle the dispute with his wife, Lipika Mitra, through mediation after they expressed willingness to settle their differences.

Bharti, former law minister of Delhi, had moved the application in a pending plea filed by his wife against a trial court’s October 7, 2015 order granting him bail in the case.&nbspThe investigators had on April 5, 2016, filed a charge sheet in the trial court in the case, claiming that the woman had alleged that Bharti had endangered the life of an unborn child she was carrying, by unleashing his dog on her.

The MLA from Malviya Nagar assembly, who was granted bail in October 2015 after being in jail for eight days, had denied the allegations.&nbspMitra had on June 10, 2015, lodged a complaint against him with the Delhi Commission for Women and an FIR was lodged by the police on September 9, 2015, for allegedly subjecting her to domestic violence and trying to kill her.&nbspThe AAP leader was arrested in the wee hours of September 29, 2015, after the Supreme Court had ordered him to surrender.

The trial court had granted bail to Bharti on the grounds that he was no longer required for investigation and observing that since he was a member of Delhi Assembly, there was no ground of apprehension that he may flee.

The trial court had granted bail to Bharti on the grounds that he was no longer required for investigation and observing that since he was a member of Delhi Assembly, there was no ground of apprehension that he may flee.

A Delhi court on Monday issued a bailable warrant against AAP leader Somnath Bharti after he failed to appear before it in a domestic violence case filed against him by his wife.&nbspSpecial Judge Arvind Kumar passed the order and directed the accused to appear in court on April 27.&nbspThe Delhi High Court had on March 20 allowed Bharti to settle the dispute with his wife, Lipika Mitra, through mediation after they expressed willingness to settle their differences. Bharti, former law minister of Delhi, had moved the application in a pending plea filed by his wife against a trial court’s October 7, 2015 order granting him bail in the case.&nbspThe investigators had on April 5, 2016, filed a charge sheet in the trial court in the case, claiming that the woman had alleged that Bharti had endangered the life of an unborn child she was carrying, by unleashing his dog on her. The MLA from Malviya Nagar assembly, who was granted bail in October 2015 after being in jail for eight days, had denied the allegations.&nbspMitra had on June 10, 2015, lodged a complaint against him with the Delhi Commission for Women and an FIR was lodged by the police on September 9, 2015, for allegedly subjecting her to domestic violence and trying to kill her.&nbspThe AAP leader was arrested in the wee hours of September 29, 2015, after the Supreme Court had ordered him to surrender. The trial court had granted bail to Bharti on the grounds that he was no longer required for investigation and observing that since he was a member of Delhi Assembly, there was no ground of apprehension that he may flee.

Domestic violence: Court issues warrant against AAP MLA Somnath Bharti

Former Pakistan&nbsp;Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his daughter Maryam on Tuesday were granted an exemption from appearing before the court in the corruption hearing against them, as their flight could not take off from Lahore due to harsh weather.

As the hearing of the Avenfield properties reference went under way, Nawaz's counsel Khawaja Haris informed Judge Mohammad Bashir the former premier's flight was not allowed to take off from Lahore owing to the weather.&nbsp;

The judge approved the request but directed Nawaz's son-in-law MNA Capt (retd) Safdar to remain in court.&nbsp;

The case was filed by National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on the Supreme Court's ruling, was in refence to Sharif's family's London apartments.&nbsp;

Sharif, his sons Hasan and Hussain, daughter Maryam and son-in-law Capt (retd) Mohammad Safdar are facing multiple corruption references in the accountability court.

The corruption references, filed against the Sharif family, pertain to the Al-Azizia Steel Mills and Hill Metal Establishment, offshore companies including Flagship Investment Ltd, and Avenfield properties of London.

Nawaz's counsel resumed cross-examining the primary witness, Wajid Zia, today.&nbsp;

Zia headed the Panama case joint investigation team (JIT) which probed the Sharif family assets last year. He is being cross-examined since the last few hearings after having recorded his statement earlier over several weeks.

During Monday's hearing, pointing to Zia's 'u-turns' in his statements, Haris pleaded the court to record the proceedings of the case. The judge informally agreed to the notion.

The Pakistan Supreme Court had, on July 28, disqualified Sharif from holding the office of the prime minister and asked the National Accountability Bureau to file references against the Sharif family in connection with corruption cases against them.

On the orders of the country's Supreme Court, a JIT was formed last year to probe the allegations on the Sharif family.

As the hearing of the Avenfield properties reference went under way, Nawaz's counsel Khawaja Haris informed Judge Mohammad Bashir the former premier's flight was not allowed to take off from Lahore owing to the weather

Former Pakistan Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his daughter Maryam on Tuesday were granted an exemption from appearing before the court in the corruption hearing against them, as their flight could not take off from Lahore due to harsh weather. As the hearing of the Avenfield properties reference went under way, Nawaz's counsel Khawaja Haris informed Judge Mohammad Bashir the former premier's flight was not allowed to take off from Lahore owing to the weather. The judge approved the request but directed Nawaz's son-in-law MNA Capt (retd) Safdar to remain in court. The case was filed by National Accountability Bureau (NAB) on the Supreme Court's ruling, was in refence to Sharif's family's London apartments. Sharif, his sons Hasan and Hussain, daughter Maryam and son-in-law Capt (retd) Mohammad Safdar are facing multiple corruption references in the accountability court. The corruption references, filed against the Sharif family, pertain to the Al-Azizia Steel Mills and Hill Metal Establishment, offshore companies including Flagship Investment Ltd, and Avenfield properties of London. Nawaz's counsel resumed cross-examining the primary witness, Wajid Zia, today. Zia headed the Panama case joint investigation team (JIT) which probed the Sharif family assets last year. He is being cross-examined since the last few hearings after having recorded his statement earlier over several weeks. During Monday's hearing, pointing to Zia's 'u-turns' in his statements, Haris pleaded the court to record the proceedings of the case. The judge informally agreed to the notion. The Pakistan Supreme Court had, on July 28, disqualified Sharif from holding the office of the prime minister and asked the National Accountability Bureau to file references against the Sharif family in connection with corruption cases against them. On the orders of the country's Supreme Court, a JIT was formed last year to probe the allegations on the Sharif family.

Nawaz, daughter Maryam exempted from appearing in court in corruption case

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is likely to move a plea in a special CBI court today. The CBI seeks the permission to record the statement of former media baron Peter Mukerjea before the court in connection with the INX media case.

CBI's plea will be filed under Section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

Peter Mukerjea was sent to CBI custody till March 31 by a Delhi court on Monday after seeking five-day custody.&nbsp;

Mukerjea-owned INX Media Ltd had allegedly paid bribes to get a Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) approval which was facilitated by former finance minister P. Chidambaram's son Karti Chidambaram.

Karti Chidambaram was granted bail by the Delhi High Court on March 23.&nbsp;

(With inputs from ANI)&nbsp;

Peter Mukerjea was sent to CBI custody till March 31 by a Delhi court on Monday

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) is likely to move a plea in a special CBI court today. The CBI seeks the permission to record the statement of former media baron Peter Mukerjea before the court in connection with the INX media case. CBI's plea will be filed under Section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). Peter Mukerjea was sent to CBI custody till March 31 by a Delhi court on Monday after seeking five-day custody. Mukerjea-owned INX Media Ltd had allegedly paid bribes to get a Foreign Investment Promotion Board (FIPB) approval which was facilitated by former finance minister P. Chidambaram's son Karti Chidambaram. Karti Chidambaram was granted bail by the Delhi High Court on March 23. (With inputs from ANI)

INX media case: CBI to move plea to record Peter Mukerjea's statement before court

The Lahore High Court today gave a deadline of 15 days to the Pakistan government to explain why Mumbai attack mastermind Hafiz Saeed&#39;s outfit JuD and its charity wing had been banned and their accounts frozen.

The court order came during a petition filed by Jamaat-ud-Dawah (JuD) chief Saeed yesterday, challenging a notification of the interior ministry of Pakistan to ban his social welfare activities.

Saeed filed the petition through his counsel Advocate A K Dogar.

He submitted to the Lahore High Court (LHC) that the interior ministry on February 10 had issued the notification related to freezing bank accounts and taking over assets associated with the JuD and Falah-i-Insaaniyat Foundation (FIF) under the Anti-Terrorism (amendment) Ordinance 2018.

The LHC today ordered the federal government to submit its reply in court by March 29 on why the organisation and its charity wing had been banned and their accounts frozen, Dawn News reported.

The petitioner alleged that the government of Pakistan had acted under the pressure of foreign powers, including the US and India, the report said.

He contended that Pakistan is a sovereign independent state and makes its own laws to govern its citizens.

He added that if there was a conflict between the laws of the land and any provision of the United Nations Security Council Act, 1948, the law of the land shall prevail, it added.

The FIF owns 369 ambulances, helped 72,000 persons to charity hospitals and treated 600,000 patients only in 2017, Saeed said.

He pleaded the court to declare the impugned notification of the interior ministry null and void with regard to taking over the assets of the organisations.

Separately, Saeed, last week challenged the presidential ordinance under which his group has been banned for being on the watch-list of the United Nations in the Islamabad High Court.

President Mamnoon Hussain last month promulgated an ordinance amending the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 with regards to the proscription of terrorist individuals and organisations to include entities listed by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) - in a move to declare Hafiz Saeed-linked JuD and FIF as proscribed groups.

Saeed, who in November last year was set free from a 300-day-long house arrest, has been repeatedly accused by the US and India of masterminding the 2008 Mumbai attacks that killed 166 people.

Saeed was declared a global terrorist by the US and UN over his alleged role in the Mumbai attacks.

JuD is considered by the US and India to be a front for LeT, the militant group blamed for the attacks.

Mumbai attack mastermind Hafiz Saeed's outfit JuD and its charity wing have been banned and their accounts frozen

The Lahore High Court today gave a deadline of 15 days to the Pakistan government to explain why Mumbai attack mastermind Hafiz Saeed's outfit JuD and its charity wing had been banned and their accounts frozen. The court order came during a petition filed by Jamaat-ud-Dawah (JuD) chief Saeed yesterday, challenging a notification of the interior ministry of Pakistan to ban his social welfare activities. Saeed filed the petition through his counsel Advocate A K Dogar. He submitted to the Lahore High Court (LHC) that the interior ministry on February 10 had issued the notification related to freezing bank accounts and taking over assets associated with the JuD and Falah-i-Insaaniyat Foundation (FIF) under the Anti-Terrorism (amendment) Ordinance 2018. The LHC today ordered the federal government to submit its reply in court by March 29 on why the organisation and its charity wing had been banned and their accounts frozen, Dawn News reported. The petitioner alleged that the government of Pakistan had acted under the pressure of foreign powers, including the US and India, the report said. He contended that Pakistan is a sovereign independent state and makes its own laws to govern its citizens. He added that if there was a conflict between the laws of the land and any provision of the United Nations Security Council Act, 1948, the law of the land shall prevail, it added. The FIF owns 369 ambulances, helped 72,000 persons to charity hospitals and treated 600,000 patients only in 2017, Saeed said. He pleaded the court to declare the impugned notification of the interior ministry null and void with regard to taking over the assets of the organisations. Separately, Saeed, last week challenged the presidential ordinance under which his group has been banned for being on the watch-list of the United Nations in the Islamabad High Court. President Mamnoon Hussain last month promulgated an ordinance amending the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 with regards to the proscription of terrorist individuals and organisations to include entities listed by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) - in a move to declare Hafiz Saeed-linked JuD and FIF as proscribed groups. Saeed, who in November last year was set free from a 300-day-long house arrest, has been repeatedly accused by the US and India of masterminding the 2008 Mumbai attacks that killed 166 people. Saeed was declared a global terrorist by the US and UN over his alleged role in the Mumbai attacks. JuD is considered by the US and India to be a front for LeT, the militant group blamed for the attacks.

Court orders Pakistan government to explain JuD, charity ban

A trial court in Jharkhand on Friday convicted 11 people accused in a cow vigilantism-related murder case.&nbsp;

Reports say that the sentencing will be held on March 20. All of the 11 accused &ndash; including a local BJP leader &ndash; were convicted under IPC Section 302 (murder). In addition, three of them were convicted under Section 120B (conspiracy) &ndash; suggesting that the court was convinced that the attack was pre-planned.

As per reports the accused will be appealing the conviction. This is the first ever incident where a conviction case has been filed against violence in the name of cow protection anywhere in India. &nbsp;

Last year, a mob of more than 100 people in Jharkhand&rsquo;s Ramgarh district lynched a 45-year-old Muslim trader on the suspicion of carrying beef in his car.&nbsp;

The man was beaten to death in the Bazaar Tand area of Ramgarh district. His van was set on fire too.

The incident happened on a day Prime Minister Narendra Modi warned against mob attacks on cattle traders, beef-eaters and dairy farmers, saying killing people in the name of protecting cows is unacceptable.

Meanwhile, last week, police seized over 30 kgs of meat, suspected to be beef, while it was being transported by an auto rickshaw to a hotel in Chandwa, Latehar district.&nbsp;

The police also arrested the driver and also booked the hotel owner and sealed the hotel.

Last year, a mob of more than 100 people in Jharkhand’s Ramgarh district lynched a 45-year-old Muslim trader on the suspicion of carrying beef in his car

A trial court in Jharkhand on Friday convicted 11 people accused in a cow vigilantism-related murder case. Reports say that the sentencing will be held on March 20. All of the 11 accused – including a local BJP leader – were convicted under IPC Section 302 (murder). In addition, three of them were convicted under Section 120B (conspiracy) – suggesting that the court was convinced that the attack was pre-planned. As per reports the accused will be appealing the conviction. This is the first ever incident where a conviction case has been filed against violence in the name of cow protection anywhere in India. Last year, a mob of more than 100 people in Jharkhand’s Ramgarh district lynched a 45-year-old Muslim trader on the suspicion of carrying beef in his car. The man was beaten to death in the Bazaar Tand area of Ramgarh district. His van was set on fire too. The incident happened on a day Prime Minister Narendra Modi warned against mob attacks on cattle traders, beef-eaters and dairy farmers, saying killing people in the name of protecting cows is unacceptable. Meanwhile, last week, police seized over 30 kgs of meat, suspected to be beef, while it was being transported by an auto rickshaw to a hotel in Chandwa, Latehar district. The police also arrested the driver and also booked the hotel owner and sealed the hotel.

Jharkhand court convicts 11 in gau raksha murder case

Porn star Stormy Daniels will go to court on July 12 in a bid to dissolve an agreement stopping her discussing an affair she says she had with President Donald Trump, according to court papers published Wednesday.

Lawyer Michael Avenatti filed a lawsuit on behalf of Daniels last week seeking to toss out the confidential settlement she signed just days before the November 2016 election.

The lawsuit alleges that Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, began an &quot;intimate relationship&quot; with Trump in the summer of 2006 that continued well into 2007.

She has offered to return the $130,000 she received so that she can be free to &quot;speak openly and freely about her prior relationship with the president and the attempts to silence her.&quot;

Daniels is also asking to be allowed to publish text messages, photos and videos relating to the president, Avenatti said in a letter to Trump&#39;s lawyer Michael Cohen.

&quot;I think it&#39;s time for her to tell her story and for the public to decide who&#39;s telling the truth,&quot; Avenatti said last week.

A copy of the settlement filed in court shows that Daniels received the $130,000 from a company known as Essential Consultants LLC in return for her silence.

Using the pseudonyms Peggy Peterson and David Dennison, Daniels and Trump were to sign the agreement, along with Essential Consultants.

But Trump never signed, providing the basis for Avenatti&#39;s attempt to have it thrown out and release Daniels from her obligations.

Daniels is asking for presiding judge Elizabeth Feffer to be replaced, arguing that she has a conflict of interest because she is seeking an appointment to a seat in federal court.

The White House has denied any sexual encounter between Trump and Daniels.

Porn star Stormy Daniels will go to court on July 12 in a bid to dissolve an agreement stopping her discussing an affair she says she had with President Donald Trump

Porn star Stormy Daniels will go to court on July 12 in a bid to dissolve an agreement stopping her discussing an affair she says she had with President Donald Trump, according to court papers published Wednesday. Lawyer Michael Avenatti filed a lawsuit on behalf of Daniels last week seeking to toss out the confidential settlement she signed just days before the November 2016 election. The lawsuit alleges that Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, began an "intimate relationship" with Trump in the summer of 2006 that continued well into 2007. She has offered to return the $130,000 she received so that she can be free to "speak openly and freely about her prior relationship with the president and the attempts to silence her." Daniels is also asking to be allowed to publish text messages, photos and videos relating to the president, Avenatti said in a letter to Trump's lawyer Michael Cohen. "I think it's time for her to tell her story and for the public to decide who's telling the truth," Avenatti said last week. A copy of the settlement filed in court shows that Daniels received the $130,000 from a company known as Essential Consultants LLC in return for her silence. Using the pseudonyms Peggy Peterson and David Dennison, Daniels and Trump were to sign the agreement, along with Essential Consultants. But Trump never signed, providing the basis for Avenatti's attempt to have it thrown out and release Daniels from her obligations. Daniels is asking for presiding judge Elizabeth Feffer to be replaced, arguing that she has a conflict of interest because she is seeking an appointment to a seat in federal court. The White House has denied any sexual encounter between Trump and Daniels.

Hearing date set for Trump showdown with porn star

The Delhi high court on Wednesday put on hold the operation of a CBSE notification laying down eligibility conditions, including upper age limit of 25 years and 30 years for general and reserved categories respectively, to apply for MBBS course.

The order was passed by a bench of justices Sanjiv Khanna and Chander Shekhar on several petitions moved by medical aspirants who are aggrieved by various other eligibility norms which bar them from applying for the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET)-UG for which the last date for submitting the application is on 9 March.

Under the CBSE notification, candidates who have studied in open school, students who have had biology as an additional subject, those who have taken more than two years to complete their 11th and 12th and students who have studied privately were not eligible to apply for the exam.

The court, while passing its interim order, made it clear that while the candidates are allowed to submit their application for the entrance exam, it does not mean that they can sit for it.

The bench also said students from open school or those who have studied privately should belong to a recognised board in order to apply for the exam. The court said the interim order will continue till the next date of hearing on 6 April.

The Delhi high court in its interim order also made it clear that while the candidates are allowed to submit their application for the NEET, it does not mean that they can sit for it

The Delhi high court on Wednesday put on hold the operation of a CBSE notification laying down eligibility conditions, including upper age limit of 25 years and 30 years for general and reserved categories respectively, to apply for MBBS course. The order was passed by a bench of justices Sanjiv Khanna and Chander Shekhar on several petitions moved by medical aspirants who are aggrieved by various other eligibility norms which bar them from applying for the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET)-UG for which the last date for submitting the application is on 9 March. Under the CBSE notification, candidates who have studied in open school, students who have had biology as an additional subject, those who have taken more than two years to complete their 11th and 12th and students who have studied privately were not eligible to apply for the exam. The court, while passing its interim order, made it clear that while the candidates are allowed to submit their application for the entrance exam, it does not mean that they can sit for it. The bench also said students from open school or those who have studied privately should belong to a recognised board in order to apply for the exam. The court said the interim order will continue till the next date of hearing on 6 April.

Delhi High Court stays CBSE notification on eligibility norms for NEET

Delhi Police have told the court hearing the case that CCTV footage of the assault on Delhi Chief Secretary Anshu Prakash was tampered with.&nbsp;

Police added that the footage will be examined by the Forensic Science Laboratory.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
Alleged assault of <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/DelhiChiefSecretary?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#DelhiChiefSecretary</a> Anshu Prakash: Delhi Police said the CCTV was tampered and that the Forensic Science Laboratory(FSL) would examine it. Court reserves order for tomorrow
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/968017067696971776?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 26, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

The alleged <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/breakdown-of-governance-say-ias-officers-after-delhi-chief-secretary-alleges-assault-by-aap-mlas-33465" target="_blank">assault on Prakash</a> by two Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLAs took place last Monday night, with the chief secretary saying Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal was present during the attack.&nbsp;

The medical report of the attack has confirmed <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/delhi-chief-secretary-assault-case-medical-report-confirms-injuries-33606" target="_blank">injuries</a> to Prakash&#39;s face.&nbsp;

The two AAP ministers accused of attacking Prakash have since surrendered to police and have been remanded in police custody.&nbsp;

Delhi&#39;s Arvind Kejiwal-led Aam Aadmi Party government has had a running tiff with the city&#39;s Lieutenant Governor.&nbsp;

AAP has also accused the city&#39;s bureaucrats of putting up hurdles in the way of their work.&nbsp;

Since the alleged attack on the chief secretary, Delhi&#39;s officers have not been attending meetings of the chief minister and his cabinet colleagues, demanding that Kejriwal apologise for the incident.&nbsp;

The Delhi Administrative Subordinate Services meanwhile have gone on strike.&nbsp;

Anshu Prakash was allegedly assaulted by two AAP ministers in the presence of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal

Delhi Police have told the court hearing the case that CCTV footage of the assault on Delhi Chief Secretary Anshu Prakash was tampered with. Police added that the footage will be examined by the Forensic Science Laboratory. Alleged assault of #DelhiChiefSecretary Anshu Prakash: Delhi Police said the CCTV was tampered and that the Forensic Science Laboratory(FSL) would examine it. Court reserves order for tomorrow — ANI (@ANI) February 26, 2018 × The alleged assault on Prakash by two Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MLAs took place last Monday night, with the chief secretary saying Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal was present during the attack. The medical report of the attack has confirmed injuries to Prakash's face. The two AAP ministers accused of attacking Prakash have since surrendered to police and have been remanded in police custody. Delhi's Arvind Kejiwal-led Aam Aadmi Party government has had a running tiff with the city's Lieutenant Governor. AAP has also accused the city's bureaucrats of putting up hurdles in the way of their work. Since the alleged attack on the chief secretary, Delhi's officers have not been attending meetings of the chief minister and his cabinet colleagues, demanding that Kejriwal apologise for the incident. The Delhi Administrative Subordinate Services meanwhile have gone on strike.

Delhi Chief Secretary assault case: Cops tell court CCTV footage tampered with

A Delhi court has refused to restrain the media from reporting the alleged sexual harassment case against R K Pachauri, former Director General of The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), but asked the press to play a balanced role and shun sensationalism.

The court acknowledged the right of the public to know the developments in the case and asserted that any gag order would &quot;trample&quot; that right.

It said the earlier &#39;interim orders&#39; asking the media to report the high-profile case in a particular manner, as &quot;uncalled for&quot; and hence, stood &quot;vacated&quot;.

&quot;The injunction, as sought for, falls foul to the said explicit proposition of the law. Such restraints as sought for, not only amount to enforcing a gag order upon the media but at the same time prevents the right of the public to be kept updated about the developments &ndash; their right to know is infracted or trampled upon,&quot; Additional District Judge Sumit Dass, said.

The court also said that all reportage on the matter should carry Pachauri&#39;s or his representative&#39;s views as well.

&quot;In the event, if such views or comments are not given by them, then a statement as to the fact that an effort was made to ascertain their views should also be made in the news, articles or programmes, as the case may be,&quot; it said.

The court also directed the media houses to mention in their reports that &quot;the matter is still sub-judice or is still pending in the court or a final decision in the case is still awaited&quot;.

The court noted that while reporting sexual harassment matters, the media has to play a very balanced role, as such reports have wide repercussions, affect dignity and infract into the privacy of individuals besides having a bearing on the functioning and reputations of the institutions involved.

&quot;It won&#39;t be any misnomer or palpably wrong to say that it has the potential to make or mar a person&#39;s reputation and career. Thus, with such a wide encompassing power, a corresponding duty also lies upon the media to report such a matter in a neutral, impartial and objective manner.

&quot;However, there is no gainsaying that an endeavour is always made by media to somehow or the other to catch the eyeballs or the attention of the viewers/readers.

In the said race, many a time, the stories which are presented, contain exaggeration, sweeping statements are made, element of sensationalisation is inserted - a sort of jingoistic or aggressive narrative or undertone is adopted, same is done to create a hype or a buzz or even a sort of a hysteria around the news and sometimes even a sort of crusader approach is adopted while reporting of the news,&quot; it said.

The court said it was not merely that the media can make fair comment only in respect of public persons holding public office.

&quot;The plaintiff himself had stated that he is a recipient of various awards/well- decorated and also claims himself to be a leading luminary in his field having national and international stature. Thus, he has a public persona or is a public figure and has to be under public gaze,&quot; it said.

After registration of an FIR against him by a colleague in 2015, and with more women raising allegations in the months that followed, a civil suit was filed by Pachauri against some media houses in 2016.

Pachauri had filed the plea for injunction alleging defamation and sought damages amounting to Rs one crore against some media houses, one of the women who had complained against him and her lawyer.

Pachauri had filed the plea for injunction alleging defamation and sought damages amounting to Rs 1 crore against some media houses

A Delhi court has refused to restrain the media from reporting the alleged sexual harassment case against R K Pachauri, former Director General of The Energy and Resources Institute (TERI), but asked the press to play a balanced role and shun sensationalism. The court acknowledged the right of the public to know the developments in the case and asserted that any gag order would "trample" that right. It said the earlier 'interim orders' asking the media to report the high-profile case in a particular manner, as "uncalled for" and hence, stood "vacated". "The injunction, as sought for, falls foul to the said explicit proposition of the law. Such restraints as sought for, not only amount to enforcing a gag order upon the media but at the same time prevents the right of the public to be kept updated about the developments – their right to know is infracted or trampled upon," Additional District Judge Sumit Dass, said. The court also said that all reportage on the matter should carry Pachauri's or his representative's views as well. "In the event, if such views or comments are not given by them, then a statement as to the fact that an effort was made to ascertain their views should also be made in the news, articles or programmes, as the case may be," it said. The court also directed the media houses to mention in their reports that "the matter is still sub-judice or is still pending in the court or a final decision in the case is still awaited". The court noted that while reporting sexual harassment matters, the media has to play a very balanced role, as such reports have wide repercussions, affect dignity and infract into the privacy of individuals besides having a bearing on the functioning and reputations of the institutions involved. "It won't be any misnomer or palpably wrong to say that it has the potential to make or mar a person's reputation and career. Thus, with such a wide encompassing power, a corresponding duty also lies upon the media to report such a matter in a neutral, impartial and objective manner. "However, there is no gainsaying that an endeavour is always made by media to somehow or the other to catch the eyeballs or the attention of the viewers/readers. In the said race, many a time, the stories which are presented, contain exaggeration, sweeping statements are made, element of sensationalisation is inserted - a sort of jingoistic or aggressive narrative or undertone is adopted, same is done to create a hype or a buzz or even a sort of a hysteria around the news and sometimes even a sort of crusader approach is adopted while reporting of the news," it said. The court said it was not merely that the media can make fair comment only in respect of public persons holding public office. "The plaintiff himself had stated that he is a recipient of various awards/well- decorated and also claims himself to be a leading luminary in his field having national and international stature. Thus, he has a public persona or is a public figure and has to be under public gaze," it said. After registration of an FIR against him by a colleague in 2015, and with more women raising allegations in the months that followed, a civil suit was filed by Pachauri against some media houses in 2016. Pachauri had filed the plea for injunction alleging defamation and sought damages amounting to Rs one crore against some media houses, one of the women who had complained against him and her lawyer.

Court refuses to restrain media from reporting sexual assault case against RK Pachauri

court

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