The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (Sep 30) rejected the bail pleas of former JNU scholar Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 North East Delhi riots case registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).A division bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Dinesh Bhatt said it was bound by the Supreme Court’s January 2026 ruling in the case concerning Gulfisha Fatima and could not alter the conditions laid down by the apex court.“This court is bound by judicial discipline,” the High Court said.<h2>Court rejects bail pleas</h2>The Supreme Court had earlier denied regular bail to Khalid and Imam while granting relief to several other accused. It had allowed them to renew their bail pleas after the examination of protected witnesses was completed or after one year from its January 5, 2026 order, whichever came earlier.The High Court noted that Khalid and Imam had sought bail citing changes in circumstances, including developments concerning the Supreme Court’s Gulfisha Fatima judgment and interim bail granted to co-accused Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi.However, the bench held that the roles attributed to Ahmed and Saifi were different from those alleged against Khalid and Imam. Therefore, the two could not claim bail on the basis of parity.<h2>Case returns to trial proceedings</h2>Khalid and Imam had approached the High Court after a trial court rejected their bail applications on July 4. Their latest pleas were filed under Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act.The case stems from FIR 59 of 2020, which concerns allegations of a larger conspiracy linked to the February 2020 communal violence in North-East Delhi. The prosecution case includes charges under the IPC and UAPA.The High Court ultimately dismissed both appeals, leaving the Supreme Court’s January 2026 conditions intact. &nbsp;

Delhi High Court rejects Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam’s bail pleas in the 2020 Delhi riots case, citing Supreme Court directions and differences in the roles attributed to the accused.

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (Sep 30) rejected the bail pleas of former JNU scholar Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam in the 2020 North East Delhi riots case registered under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). A division bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh and Justice Dinesh Bhatt said it was bound by the Supreme Court’s January 2026 ruling in the case concerning Gulfisha Fatima and could not alter the conditions laid down by the apex court. “This court is bound by judicial discipline,” the High Court said. Court rejects bail pleas The Supreme Court had earlier denied regular bail to Khalid and Imam while granting relief to several other accused. It had allowed them to renew their bail pleas after the examination of protected witnesses was completed or after one year from its January 5, 2026 order, whichever came earlier. The High Court noted that Khalid and Imam had sought bail citing changes in circumstances, including developments concerning the Supreme Court’s Gulfisha Fatima judgment and interim bail granted to co-accused Tasleem Ahmed and Khalid Saifi. However, the bench held that the roles attributed to Ahmed and Saifi were different from those alleged against Khalid and Imam. Therefore, the two could not claim bail on the basis of parity. Case returns to trial proceedings Khalid and Imam had approached the High Court after a trial court rejected their bail applications on July 4. Their latest pleas were filed under Section 21 of the National Investigation Agency Act. The case stems from FIR 59 of 2020, which concerns allegations of a larger conspiracy linked to the February 2020 communal violence in North-East Delhi. The prosecution case includes charges under the IPC and UAPA. The High Court ultimately dismissed both appeals, leaving the Supreme Court’s January 2026 conditions intact.

Delhi High Court rejects Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam’s bail pleas in the 2020 Delhi riots case, citing Supreme Court directions and differences in the roles attributed to the accused.

Delhi riots case: HC rejects bail pleas of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam

The Delhi High Court has refused to quash a POCSO case against a man who married a 16-year-old girl, holding that a marriage claimed to be valid under Muslim personal law cannot shield an adult from prosecution for having sexual intercourse with a wife below 18.&nbsp;The court said such a view would weaken the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and refused to quash an FIR against a man accused of sexually assaulting his minor wife.&nbsp;Justice Sanjeev Narula said in his September 23 order that the statutory age of 18 under the POCSO Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) cannot be replaced by the concept of puberty under personal law.&nbsp;Justice Narula said the law’s protection cannot depend on whether a marriage was arranged before the sexual relationship came to light. “The statutory protection would then depend not upon the age of the child, but upon whether a marriage had been arranged before the sexual relationship was discovered. That would turn the legislation on its head,” the court said.The court was dealing with a petition seeking the quashing of FIR No. 189/2026 registered at Darya Ganj Police Station under Section 64(1) of the BNS and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.&nbsp;&nbsp;The case involved a couple who married when the girl was 16 years and three months old and the man was 28. They lived together, and the girl became pregnant. Her age came to light when she went to a government hospital during her pregnancy. She later delivered a stillborn baby in June. After the hospital authorities informed the police, a case was registered against the man under the POCSO Act.The girl said the marriage had taken place with the consent of both families and that she had not faced any force or coercion. She had earlier supported the man’s bail plea and sought his presence during her pregnancy.&nbsp;The court said the girl’s consent or the absence of force and coercion could take the case outside POCSO. “POCSO does not confer such a power upon the child, her parents, or the Court,” it observed.&nbsp;In their plea before the court, the couple argued that under Muslim personal law, a girl who had attained puberty was competent to marry, and so if the marriage was valid, then the subsequent sexual relationship could not lead to criminal liability.&nbsp;The court rejected the argument, saying a marriage under Muslim personal law does not by itself remove the criminality of sexual relations with a minor. “To quash the FIR merely because the parties describe themselves as married and petitioner no. 2 supports petitioner no. 1 would effectively introduce a marital exception into the POCSO Act for a category of children for whom Parliament has consciously provided none,” it said.The court added that marriage does not change a child’s age, and drew a distinction between the civil validity of a marriage and the criminal consequences of sexual intercourse with a minor.&nbsp;The court clarified that it was not deciding whether the nikah was valid, void or voidable.&nbsp;Justice Narula said that even if the marriage was assumed to be valid under Muslim personal law, it could not create an exception to the POCSO Act or the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. “The conclusion is narrower: a marriage claimed to be valid under Muslim personal law cannot, by reason of that status alone, confer immunity from POCSO or BNS for sexual intercourse with a wife who was below 18 at the relevant time. Any other view would create, through judicial decision, an exception which Parliament has expressly excluded,” the court said.&nbsp;The HC also rejected the argument that the FIR was unsustainable because neither the girl nor her family had approached the police. In this case, once doctors learnt that the pregnant patient was below 18, the statutory reporting mechanism was triggered, the court said.&nbsp;&nbsp;The petitioners had also sought disciplinary action against police officials and compensation for alleged false implication and harassment.

The Delhi High Court said that the girl’s consent or the absence of force and coercion could not take the case out of the purview of the POCSO Act. “POCSO does not confer such a power upon the child, her parents, or the Court,” it observed.

The Delhi High Court has refused to quash a POCSO case against a man who married a 16-year-old girl, holding that a marriage claimed to be valid under Muslim personal law cannot shield an adult from prosecution for having sexual intercourse with a wife below 18. The court said such a view would weaken the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act and refused to quash an FIR against a man accused of sexually assaulting his minor wife. Justice Sanjeev Narula said in his September 23 order that the statutory age of 18 under the POCSO Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) cannot be replaced by the concept of puberty under personal law. Justice Narula said the law’s protection cannot depend on whether a marriage was arranged before the sexual relationship came to light. “The statutory protection would then depend not upon the age of the child, but upon whether a marriage had been arranged before the sexual relationship was discovered. That would turn the legislation on its head,” the court said. The court was dealing with a petition seeking the quashing of FIR No. 189/2026 registered at Darya Ganj Police Station under Section 64(1) of the BNS and Section 6 of the POCSO Act. The case involved a couple who married when the girl was 16 years and three months old and the man was 28. They lived together, and the girl became pregnant. Her age came to light when she went to a government hospital during her pregnancy. She later delivered a stillborn baby in June. After the hospital authorities informed the police, a case was registered against the man under the POCSO Act. The girl said the marriage had taken place with the consent of both families and that she had not faced any force or coercion. She had earlier supported the man’s bail plea and sought his presence during her pregnancy. The court said the girl’s consent or the absence of force and coercion could take the case outside POCSO. “POCSO does not confer such a power upon the child, her parents, or the Court,” it observed. In their plea before the court, the couple argued that under Muslim personal law, a girl who had attained puberty was competent to marry, and so if the marriage was valid, then the subsequent sexual relationship could not lead to criminal liability. The court rejected the argument, saying a marriage under Muslim personal law does not by itself remove the criminality of sexual relations with a minor. “To quash the FIR merely because the parties describe themselves as married and petitioner no. 2 supports petitioner no. 1 would effectively introduce a marital exception into the POCSO Act for a category of children for whom Parliament has consciously provided none,” it said. The court added that marriage does not change a child’s age, and drew a distinction between the civil validity of a marriage and the criminal consequences of sexual intercourse with a minor. The court clarified that it was not deciding whether the nikah was valid, void or voidable. Justice Narula said that even if the marriage was assumed to be valid under Muslim personal law, it could not create an exception to the POCSO Act or the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. “The conclusion is narrower: a marriage claimed to be valid under Muslim personal law cannot, by reason of that status alone, confer immunity from POCSO or BNS for sexual intercourse with a wife who was below 18 at the relevant time. Any other view would create, through judicial decision, an exception which Parliament has expressly excluded,” the court said. The HC also rejected the argument that the FIR was unsustainable because neither the girl nor her family had approached the police. In this case, once doctors learnt that the pregnant patient was below 18, the statutory reporting mechanism was triggered, the court said. The petitioners had also sought disciplinary action against police officials and compensation for alleged false implication and harassment.

The Delhi High Court said that the girl’s consent or the absence of force and coercion could not take the case out of the purview of the POCSO Act. “POCSO does not confer such a power upon the child, her parents, or the Court,” it observed.

Muslim marriage cannot shield sex with minor wife from prosecution under POCSO: Delhi HC

The British High Commission in New Delhi has said it is in contact with the family of UK national Jagtar Singh Johal after the Delhi High Court granted him bail on Friday, following almost nine years in custody on terror-related charges.A spokesperson said: “We are in touch with Mr Johal’s family following Friday's developments. The UK continues to raise concerns about Mr Johal’s prolonged detention at every appropriate opportunity with the Government of India. We have made clear that faster progress is needed to reach a resolution, including a full investigation into Mr Johal’s allegations of torture.”&nbsp;The comments followed a roughly 30-page order by a division bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja, which granted bail to Johal in seven cases investigated by India’s National Investigation Agency under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and related charges. He was arrested in Punjab in November 2017, and has been accused of a role in targeted killings linked by prosecutors to the Khalistan Liberation Force. He has denied the allegations. A Punjab court acquitted him in one related case in March 2025.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-extends-h-1b-visa-s-100-000-fee-until-september-2027-what-it-means-for-indians-1789820321228">Trump extends H-1B visa's $100,000 fee until September 2027: What it means for Indians?</a>&nbsp;Johal must post a personal bond of Rs 5 lakh with two sureties of the same amount, surrender his passport, use only one phone or landline that remains switched on, and report regularly to investigators, including once a fortnight. He must give his address and contact details, not change them without notice, appear in court, avoid contact with witnesses, and not circulate material the court described as anti-national.&nbsp;The case has been a persistent issue in UK-India relations and has been raised repeatedly in the British Parliament &amp; British govt. Indian authorities have denied torture claims and said due process is being followed.

The comments followed a roughly 30-page order by a division bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja, which granted bail to Johal in seven cases investigated by India’s National Investigation Agency under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and related charges.

The British High Commission in New Delhi has said it is in contact with the family of UK national Jagtar Singh Johal after the Delhi High Court granted him bail on Friday, following almost nine years in custody on terror-related charges. A spokesperson said: “We are in touch with Mr Johal’s family following Friday's developments. The UK continues to raise concerns about Mr Johal’s prolonged detention at every appropriate opportunity with the Government of India. We have made clear that faster progress is needed to reach a resolution, including a full investigation into Mr Johal’s allegations of torture.” The comments followed a roughly 30-page order by a division bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja, which granted bail to Johal in seven cases investigated by India’s National Investigation Agency under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and related charges. He was arrested in Punjab in November 2017, and has been accused of a role in targeted killings linked by prosecutors to the Khalistan Liberation Force. He has denied the allegations. A Punjab court acquitted him in one related case in March 2025. Also read: Trump extends H-1B visa's $100,000 fee until September 2027: What it means for Indians? Johal must post a personal bond of Rs 5 lakh with two sureties of the same amount, surrender his passport, use only one phone or landline that remains switched on, and report regularly to investigators, including once a fortnight. He must give his address and contact details, not change them without notice, appear in court, avoid contact with witnesses, and not circulate material the court described as anti-national. The case has been a persistent issue in UK-India relations and has been raised repeatedly in the British Parliament & British govt. Indian authorities have denied torture claims and said due process is being followed.

The comments followed a roughly 30-page order by a division bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Ravinder Dudeja, which granted bail to Johal in seven cases investigated by India’s National Investigation Agency under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and related charges.

UK in touch with family after Delhi court grants bail to Jagtar Singh Johal

The Delhi High Court on Monday (September 7) ordered the MCD to launch the highest executive-level inquiry into the collapse of the building at Satya Niketan, calling the incident “unfortunate”. The incident has claimed the lives of at least seven people, prompting the MCD to suspend five officials from its South Zone with immediate effect. The court ordered that the probe specifically determine whether the building had valid and necessary permissions, identify the officials accountable for any lapse or failure at the authorities' level, and outline the action taken or proposed against those held responsible. The court further directed the MCD to conduct a thorough inspection, within one week, of all PG accommodations under its jurisdiction. This inspection will evaluate whether these premises are operating in accordance with required permissions and applicable building bye-laws, and will also determine the number of students residing in each PG accommodation.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/delhi-building-collapse-five-mcd-officials-suspended-as-death-toll-rises-to-7-1788768763135">Delhi building collapse: Five MCD officials suspended as death toll rises to 7</a>&nbsp;The court also observed that if the authorities had remained alert and properly performed the legal duties entrusted to them, such an unfortunate incident could, prima facie, have been prevented. Along with this, the court told the MCD to submit a written statement (affidavit) stating whether there are any statutory or executive rules that control PG accommodations and hotels in Delhi. The court also directed Delhi University to submit a written statement showing how many students from outside Delhi are admitted into its affiliated colleges, and how many hostels are currently being run either by the university or by the government.<h3>PG owner apprehended in Rajasthan's Bhiwadi</h3>Meanwhile, in a significant development, the owner of the five-storey boys’ paying guest (PG) accommodation in Delhi’s Satya Niketan area that collapsed on Sep 6 has been apprehended by police. He has been identified as Hariram Bansal and was apprehended by police from Bhiwadi in Rajasthan, near the Haryana border.&nbsp;&nbsp;A case was registered against him in the matter after Delhi CM Rekha Gupta ordered a magisterial inquiry, while the MCD ordered action against illegal constructions. The FIR against Bansal was registered under Sections 105, 290 and 125(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), relating to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, negligent conduct in connection with construction or repair of buildings, and acts endangering life or personal safety. He is currently being questioned. &nbsp;

This inspection will evaluate whether these premises are operating in accordance with required permissions and applicable building by-laws. It will also determine the number of students residing in each PG accommodation.

The Delhi High Court on Monday (September 7) ordered the MCD to launch the highest executive-level inquiry into the collapse of the building at Satya Niketan, calling the incident “unfortunate”. The incident has claimed the lives of at least seven people, prompting the MCD to suspend five officials from its South Zone with immediate effect. The court ordered that the probe specifically determine whether the building had valid and necessary permissions, identify the officials accountable for any lapse or failure at the authorities' level, and outline the action taken or proposed against those held responsible. The court further directed the MCD to conduct a thorough inspection, within one week, of all PG accommodations under its jurisdiction. This inspection will evaluate whether these premises are operating in accordance with required permissions and applicable building bye-laws, and will also determine the number of students residing in each PG accommodation. Also read: Delhi building collapse: Five MCD officials suspended as death toll rises to 7 The court also observed that if the authorities had remained alert and properly performed the legal duties entrusted to them, such an unfortunate incident could, prima facie, have been prevented. Along with this, the court told the MCD to submit a written statement (affidavit) stating whether there are any statutory or executive rules that control PG accommodations and hotels in Delhi. The court also directed Delhi University to submit a written statement showing how many students from outside Delhi are admitted into its affiliated colleges, and how many hostels are currently being run either by the university or by the government. PG owner apprehended in Rajasthan's Bhiwadi Meanwhile, in a significant development, the owner of the five-storey boys’ paying guest (PG) accommodation in Delhi’s Satya Niketan area that collapsed on Sep 6 has been apprehended by police. He has been identified as Hariram Bansal and was apprehended by police from Bhiwadi in Rajasthan, near the Haryana border. A case was registered against him in the matter after Delhi CM Rekha Gupta ordered a magisterial inquiry, while the MCD ordered action against illegal constructions. The FIR against Bansal was registered under Sections 105, 290 and 125(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), relating to culpable homicide not amounting to murder, negligent conduct in connection with construction or repair of buildings, and acts endangering life or personal safety. He is currently being questioned.

This inspection will evaluate whether these premises are operating in accordance with required permissions and applicable building by-laws. It will also determine the number of students residing in each PG accommodation.

Delhi building collapse: HC orders MCD to launch high-level inquiry after incident claims 7 lives

Delhi High Court received a bomb threat on Friday (Aug 14) via email, just a day before the 80th Independence Day of India. Registrar General of the Delhi HC was reported to be in touch with the Delhi Police.&nbsp;&nbsp;Meanwhile, the Joint Secretary of the Delhi HC, Advocate Kunal, said to ANI, "The bomb threat appears to be fake... Everything is under control. Bomb squad and sniffer dogs are scanning the entire premises. There is no threat as of now..."

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">A bomb threat has been received at the Delhi High Court through email. Registrar General of the Delhi HC is in touch with the Delhi Police. Details awaited.&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://x.com/ANI/status/2088162896455045125?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 14, 2026</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.x.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Also, according to the Delhi Fire Service, bomb threat calls were received for five additional locations: Jamnagar House, Jhandewalan Flatted Factory Complex, MB Saket Office/DM Office, Terminal 3, IGI Airport and SDM Office, Delhi Cantt. Fire tenders have been dispatched to all these locations. However, nothing suspicious has been found during the investigation so far, ANI reported.&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;

A bomb threat has been received at the Delhi High Court through email.

Delhi High Court received a bomb threat on Friday (Aug 14) via email, just a day before the 80th Independence Day of India. Registrar General of the Delhi HC was reported to be in touch with the Delhi Police. Meanwhile, the Joint Secretary of the Delhi HC, Advocate Kunal, said to ANI, "The bomb threat appears to be fake... Everything is under control. Bomb squad and sniffer dogs are scanning the entire premises. There is no threat as of now..."

A bomb threat has been received at the Delhi High Court through email.

Delhi High Court receives bomb threat via email ahead of India's 80th Independence Day

Delhi High Court on Thursday (Jul 24) agreed to hear a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the Indian government’s decision to suspend internet services in parts of central Delhi during protests over NEET paper leak. The internet was suspended in the Jantar Mantar area, where the student demonstrations are taking place.The matter was mentioned before a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia. The petitioner’s counsel urged the court to take up the plea on priority, arguing that the internet restrictions imposed in the protest area impacted citizens’ fundamental rights.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/cjp-members-may-be-arrested-tonight-dipke-claims-ahead-of-talks-with-centre-over-neet-paper-leak-1784873252398">CJP members to get arrested tonight? Dipke makes dramatic claim ahead of talks with Nadda</a>The court accepted the request and listed the matter for hearing at 2:30 pm on Friday. Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves is expected to appear on behalf of the petitioner.<h2>Internet shutdown in Delhi</h2>Internet services were suspended in Delhi during the CJP protest at the Jantar Mantar on July 20. According to reports, telecom companies were ordered to shut down internet connectivity in the region amid protests. Internet disruptions were also reported on Wednesday and Thursday, with many vendors, shopkeepers and restaurants complaining that they were unable to accept digital payments.<h2>Delhi protests</h2>The development came after a protest over a NEET paper leak organised by the Cockroach Janta Party on July 20 in Delhi turned violent, with police facing backlash for using tear gas and batons to disperse the crowd. Protesters have accused the Delhi Police of using excessive force against people at the demonstrations. The incident led to outrage across the nation, triggering demonstrations across several parts of the nation. There have been some instances of police officials being beaten by a mob as well. CJP has distanced itself from the violence in the national capital, saying that miscreants who incited violence were not part of the students’ protest organised by them but ill elements who wanted to derail the peaceful protests.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/foreign-funding-behind-cjp-delhi-hc-to-hear-plea-seeking-nia-probe-into-protest-amid-backlash-over-police-crackdown-1784787748131">Foreign funding behind CJP? Delhi HC to hear plea seeking NIA probe into protest amid backlash over police crackdown</a>On May 12, the National Testing Agency (NTA) scrapped the May 3 National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (Undergraduate), or NEET-UG, following allegations that the question paper had been leaked. A fresh examination was subsequently conducted on June 21. The incident has faced backlash from students, educationalists, and leaders. So far, the CBI has arrested 13 individuals in the case, all of whom are in judicial custody.&nbsp;

Delhi High Court agreed to hear a PIL challenging the suspension of internet services in parts of central Delhi during NEET paper leak protests at Jantar Mantar.

Delhi High Court on Thursday (Jul 24) agreed to hear a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the Indian government’s decision to suspend internet services in parts of central Delhi during protests over NEET paper leak. The internet was suspended in the Jantar Mantar area, where the student demonstrations are taking place. The matter was mentioned before a Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia. The petitioner’s counsel urged the court to take up the plea on priority, arguing that the internet restrictions imposed in the protest area impacted citizens’ fundamental rights. Also read | CJP members to get arrested tonight? Dipke makes dramatic claim ahead of talks with Nadda The court accepted the request and listed the matter for hearing at 2:30 pm on Friday. Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves is expected to appear on behalf of the petitioner. Internet shutdown in Delhi Internet services were suspended in Delhi during the CJP protest at the Jantar Mantar on July 20. According to reports, telecom companies were ordered to shut down internet connectivity in the region amid protests. Internet disruptions were also reported on Wednesday and Thursday, with many vendors, shopkeepers and restaurants complaining that they were unable to accept digital payments. Delhi protests The development came after a protest over a NEET paper leak organised by the Cockroach Janta Party on July 20 in Delhi turned violent, with police facing backlash for using tear gas and batons to disperse the crowd. Protesters have accused the Delhi Police of using excessive force against people at the demonstrations. The incident led to outrage across the nation, triggering demonstrations across several parts of the nation. There have been some instances of police officials being beaten by a mob as well. CJP has distanced itself from the violence in the national capital, saying that miscreants who incited violence were not part of the students’ protest organised by them but ill elements who wanted to derail the peaceful protests. Also read | Foreign funding behind CJP? Delhi HC to hear plea seeking NIA probe into protest amid backlash over police crackdown On May 12, the National Testing Agency (NTA) scrapped the May 3 National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (Undergraduate), or NEET-UG, following allegations that the question paper had been leaked. A fresh examination was subsequently conducted on June 21. The incident has faced backlash from students, educationalists, and leaders. So far, the CBI has arrested 13 individuals in the case, all of whom are in judicial custody.

Delhi High Court agreed to hear a PIL challenging the suspension of internet services in parts of central Delhi during NEET paper leak protests at Jantar Mantar.

Delhi High Court to hear plea challenging internet suspension near Jantar Mantar amid NEET protests

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (Jul 23) heard a pleas seeking a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe in alleged police excesses on Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protesters at Jantar Mantar and asked the Centre and State government to response on the matter. Asking for an explanation, the Delhi HC said that there is law to deal with protestors. The court observed that the incident could not have been “isolated.” The court was heard by a bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and justice Tejas Karia, who also directed police to preserve the CCTV footage, videography and other digital records related to the incident. This comes after Chief Justice of India (CJI) dismissed a petition saying “Don't waste our time.”&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/we-don-t-want-to-watch-any-videos-don-t-waste-cji-surya-kant-breaks-silence-on-police-brutality-against-students-in-delhi-1784702174337">'Don't waste...': CJI Surya Kant breaks silence on Delhi police brutality against protesting students</a><h2>What Delhi HC said?</h2>

However, the court said that the matter will be heard on September 11. The bench said, “Is it a case of some isolated individual incident? Perhaps no. This is one. Number two, if it was an unlawful assembly as you say, it’s subject to further arguments and subject to further submissions. There is a law how to deal with it. If these issues are being raised in the PIL, how can you say that every individual should go and lodge an FIR,” the court told additional solicitor general SV Raju. The court said, “Issue notice. In the meantime, we direct that the relevant record, including the CCTV footage, videography, if any shall be preserved.”&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/cjp-protest-when-does-peaceful-protest-become-an-unlawful-assembly-1784715227774">CJP protest: When does peaceful protest become an unlawful assembly?</a><h2>What more the petitioner wanted and what Police said?</h2>Representing the police, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and additional solicitor general SV Raju termed the pleas “publicity seeking petitions” which were filed by individuals for “hogging limelight.” Raju added that the agitation did not remain peaceful and there were videos showing injuries to police men and damage to police vehicles. Senior advocates N Hariharan, Gopal Sankaranarayanan and Vikas Singh who appeared for the petitioners, pressed that the protest was peaceful, and sought production orders authorising the use of force, identification of officers responsible and registration of FIRs against errant personnel.<h2>How various Courts reacted on the matter?</h2>Chief Justice Surya Kant dismissed a plea in Supreme Court on Jul 22 that urged the top court to take suo motu cognisance of the violation of fundamental rights and police brutality. The CJI said that the lawyer raising the issue should not “waste the time” of the justices and the court. "Don't waste our time and yours," the CJI adding, "We don't want to watch any videos." The petitioner had also called for the constitution of an independent judicial inquiry by a sitting bench of top court, and sought directions for registration of appropriate FIRs against the erring officials of the Delhi Police, and other concerned authorities. The plea also alleges that protesters were harassed and prevented from continuing their demonstration. The petitioner argues that the incident raises serious constitutional questions regarding the limits of police powers in dispersing peaceful assemblies&nbsp;The Delhi High Court on Jul 21 refused to urgently list a petition concerning the "excessive use of force" against students by the Delhi Police and Rapid Action Force personnel and said: “Don't drag the court into all this.”&nbsp;&nbsp;However, the Uttarakhand High Court termed the government’s action as ‘gundagardi’ (hooliganism) and criticised the State over the detention of Uttarakhand Parivartan Party chief Prabhat Dhyani, while he was travelling to Delhi to participate in the protest called by CJP.

The Delhi High Court said the Jantar Mantar incident was not an “isolated” occurrence and issued notice on a plea seeking an SIT probe. The court questioned the manner in which the incident was handled, observing, “There is a law how to handle protesters."

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (Jul 23) heard a pleas seeking a Special Investigation Team (SIT) probe in alleged police excesses on Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protesters at Jantar Mantar and asked the Centre and State government to response on the matter. Asking for an explanation, the Delhi HC said that there is law to deal with protestors. The court observed that the incident could not have been “isolated.” The court was heard by a bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and justice Tejas Karia, who also directed police to preserve the CCTV footage, videography and other digital records related to the incident. This comes after Chief Justice of India (CJI) dismissed a petition saying “Don't waste our time.” Also Read: 'Don't waste...': CJI Surya Kant breaks silence on Delhi police brutality against protesting students What Delhi HC said?

The Delhi High Court said the Jantar Mantar incident was not an “isolated” occurrence and issued notice on a plea seeking an SIT probe. The court questioned the manner in which the incident was handled, observing, “There is a law how to handle protesters."

'Some isolated incident...?' Delhi HC seeks Centre's response on alleged police brutality in Jantar Mantar protest

Climate activist Sonam Wangchuk was shifted to Delhi's Safdarjung Hospital on the 21st day of his hunger strike after his health deteriorated sharply. Doctors reported dangerously low potassium and blood sugar levels due to severe dehydration and recommended immediate treatment with IV fluids. However, Wangchuk has refused IV fluids, oral fluids, and medication. His hospitalisation comes just days before a planned march to Parliament and follows directions from the Delhi High Court to ensure regular medical monitoring.

Sonam Wangchuk hospitalised on 21st day of hunger strike | refuses IV fluids despite critical health

Meta and Google have told the Delhi High Court that they can't proactively monitor the unauthorised publication and dissemination of courtroom videos on their platforms. Meta stated it cannot act as a "super censor" or referee over daily content generation across Facebook and Instagram. Liability must rest strictly on the actual publisher or uploader. &nbsp;The submission was made in response to a Public Interest Litigation filed by advocate Vaibhav Singh alleging illegal recording and circulation of the April 13 hearing of Arvind Kejriwal seeking the recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from the CBI's Delhi liquor policy case. The petitioner sought the removal of the videos from all the platforms. The petition also mentioned AAP leaders Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Singh, Sanjeev Jha, Punardeep Sawhney, Jarnail Singh, Mukesh Ahlawat, and Vinay Mishra, as well as the Congress's Digvijaya Singh and journalist Ravish Kumar.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/rick-scott-pakistan-neutrality-khamenei-criticism-us-iran-mediation-1783424421189">'Where Bin Laden hid...': Rick Scott slams Pakistan's mediator role after Khamenei tribute</a>Meta responded that intermediaries are in no way responsible for user-generated content. It does not own or control user-generated content and has no obligation to proactively remove such content unless notified. Google also took a similar position, suggesting the functional limitation of monitoring user-generated content, including unauthorised recordings of court hearings, and determine wether it is unlawful, unless notified. They described themselves as intermediaries and suggested that responsibilities, if any, lie with the user or content creator.&nbsp;On April 23, the court directed the takedown of the social media posts containing videos of the court proceedings. The division bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has impleaded the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) as a respondent. The court noted that several respondents had not yet been served with notices, and the bench has adjourned the matter to August 27 for the next hearing. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

Meta and Google told the Delhi High Court they cannot proactively monitor unauthorised courtroom videos, arguing that liability lies with uploaders and not intermediary platforms.

Meta and Google have told the Delhi High Court that they can't proactively monitor the unauthorised publication and dissemination of courtroom videos on their platforms. Meta stated it cannot act as a "super censor" or referee over daily content generation across Facebook and Instagram. Liability must rest strictly on the actual publisher or uploader. The submission was made in response to a Public Interest Litigation filed by advocate Vaibhav Singh alleging illegal recording and circulation of the April 13 hearing of Arvind Kejriwal seeking the recusal of Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma from the CBI's Delhi liquor policy case. The petitioner sought the removal of the videos from all the platforms. The petition also mentioned AAP leaders Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Singh, Sanjeev Jha, Punardeep Sawhney, Jarnail Singh, Mukesh Ahlawat, and Vinay Mishra, as well as the Congress's Digvijaya Singh and journalist Ravish Kumar. Also Read: 'Where Bin Laden hid...': Rick Scott slams Pakistan's mediator role after Khamenei tribute Meta responded that intermediaries are in no way responsible for user-generated content. It does not own or control user-generated content and has no obligation to proactively remove such content unless notified. Google also took a similar position, suggesting the functional limitation of monitoring user-generated content, including unauthorised recordings of court hearings, and determine wether it is unlawful, unless notified. They described themselves as intermediaries and suggested that responsibilities, if any, lie with the user or content creator. On April 23, the court directed the takedown of the social media posts containing videos of the court proceedings. The division bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora has impleaded the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) as a respondent. The court noted that several respondents had not yet been served with notices, and the bench has adjourned the matter to August 27 for the next hearing.

Meta and Google told the Delhi High Court they cannot proactively monitor unauthorised courtroom videos, arguing that liability lies with uploaders and not intermediary platforms.

Meta, Google tell Delhi High Court they can't proactively act as 'super censor'

Star Indian cricketer Abhishek Sharma has approached the Delhi High Court seeking protection of his personality rights. He has requested the court to stop the unauthorized use of his name, images and identity on online platforms, including through AI-generated content. The case was heard by Justice Jyoti Singh, who reviewed several web links that Abhishek claimed were violating his personality rights. During the hearing, the Court also discussed how personality rights and defamation often overlap in cases involving online content.&nbsp;Justice Singh said the Court could not issue an order without properly checking the evidence. She pointed out that the screenshots submitted by Abhishek did not match the details listed in the case documents.&nbsp;“There is a real mess up here. You file an affidavit with a screenshot matching your table. The screenshot is way different from what you are showing. I can’t pass an order like this," the judge told Abhishek’s lawyer.&nbsp;The Court asked Abhishek to submit another affidavit with screenshots that correctly match the links and details mentioned in the case papers.&nbsp;&nbsp;“I am not saying I am not inclined to, but I can’t pass an order this way," the judge added.&nbsp;In his petition, Abhishek has requested the removal of content that he says violates his personality rights, including AI-generated posts shared on social media.&nbsp;Also Read - <a href="https://www.wionews.com/sports/ms-dhoni-s-birthday-fifa-joins-thala-for-a-reason-trend-with-golden-boot-post-1783424126948">MS Dhoni’s birthday: FIFA joins ‘Thala for a Reason’ trend with Golden Boot post</a>&nbsp;During the hearing, advocate Varun Pathak, representing Meta Platforms, told the Court that two of the eight web links listed by Abhishek were no longer accessible. He also argued that one of the remaining links contained a post from a paparazzi account and might not amount to a violation of personality rights.&nbsp;Also Read - <a href="https://www.wionews.com/sports/fifa-wc-2026-argentina-vs-egypt-r16-when-and-where-to-watch-live-streaming-in-india-1783419997662">FIFA WC 2026, Argentina vs Egypt R16: Where to watch live streaming in India?</a>&nbsp;However, Abhishek’s lawyer disagreed, saying the content was created using artificial intelligence. He argued that one post falsely described Abhishek’s manager as his girlfriend and used an AI-generated image to create a misleading impression.&nbsp;“What is it indicating? Is that he is crying over the shoulders of another and it is an AI-generated image. It isn’t a paparazzi issue. He is clicked with the manager and then given a different colour to it using artificial intelligence," the lawyer said.

Cricketer Abhishek Sharma has approached the Delhi High Court seeking protection of his personality rights. His plea raises concerns over the unauthorized use of AI-generated content and defamatory material using his identity.

Star Indian cricketer Abhishek Sharma has approached the Delhi High Court seeking protection of his personality rights. He has requested the court to stop the unauthorized use of his name, images and identity on online platforms, including through AI-generated content. The case was heard by Justice Jyoti Singh, who reviewed several web links that Abhishek claimed were violating his personality rights. During the hearing, the Court also discussed how personality rights and defamation often overlap in cases involving online content. Justice Singh said the Court could not issue an order without properly checking the evidence. She pointed out that the screenshots submitted by Abhishek did not match the details listed in the case documents. “There is a real mess up here. You file an affidavit with a screenshot matching your table. The screenshot is way different from what you are showing. I can’t pass an order like this," the judge told Abhishek’s lawyer. The Court asked Abhishek to submit another affidavit with screenshots that correctly match the links and details mentioned in the case papers. “I am not saying I am not inclined to, but I can’t pass an order this way," the judge added. In his petition, Abhishek has requested the removal of content that he says violates his personality rights, including AI-generated posts shared on social media. Also Read - MS Dhoni’s birthday: FIFA joins ‘Thala for a Reason’ trend with Golden Boot post During the hearing, advocate Varun Pathak, representing Meta Platforms, told the Court that two of the eight web links listed by Abhishek were no longer accessible. He also argued that one of the remaining links contained a post from a paparazzi account and might not amount to a violation of personality rights. Also Read - FIFA WC 2026, Argentina vs Egypt R16: Where to watch live streaming in India? However, Abhishek’s lawyer disagreed, saying the content was created using artificial intelligence. He argued that one post falsely described Abhishek’s manager as his girlfriend and used an AI-generated image to create a misleading impression. “What is it indicating? Is that he is crying over the shoulders of another and it is an AI-generated image. It isn’t a paparazzi issue. He is clicked with the manager and then given a different colour to it using artificial intelligence," the lawyer said.

Cricketer Abhishek Sharma has approached the Delhi High Court seeking protection of his personality rights. His plea raises concerns over the unauthorized use of AI-generated content and defamatory material using his identity.

Cricketer Abhishek Sharma seeks Delhi High Court protection for personality rights

The Supreme Court on Friday (May 29) permitted wrestler Vinesh Phogat to participate in the selection trials for the 2026 Asian Games, scheduled to be held on May 30 and 31. A bench comprising Justices P S Narasimha and Alok Aradhe heard the appeal filed by the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) against the Delhi High Court’s earlier order allowing Phogat to compete. During the hearing, the apex court indicated that preventing her from participating at this stage would be unfair.&nbsp;“Today at this stage, the high court having passed the order, the hope and expectations have risen. To tell her to go back home and we can’t do anything, will not be proper. We are very bold in telling you this," the bench told the counsel appearing for the WFI.&nbsp;The matter has been listed for further hearing next week.<h3>WFI’s challenge against Delhi High Court order</h3>The legal dispute began after the Delhi High Court granted Vinesh Phogat permission to appear in the Asian Games selection trials. The High Court noted that the WFI’s selection rules did not consider athletes returning after maternity leave and termed the policy restrictive in nature.&nbsp;Also Read -<a href="https://www.wionews.com/sports/outstanding-performance-pm-narendra-modi-congratulates-u23-wrestlers-for-historic-asian-championships-1780046843145"> 'Outstanding performance': PM Narendra Modi congratulates U23 wrestlers for historic Asian Championships</a>&nbsp;In its May 22 ruling, the court directed that Phogat be allowed to compete in the trials set for May 30 and 31. It also ordered the entire process to be video-recorded and supervised by independent observers appointed by the Sports Authority of India (SAI) and the Indian Olympic Association (IOA).&nbsp;The High Court stressed that motherhood should not become a disadvantage in the professional careers of women athletes. It further pointed out that earlier selection frameworks had given authorities flexibility to accommodate iconic athletes in exceptional circumstances.&nbsp;Also Read - <a href="https://www.wionews.com/sports/french-open-2026-watch-osaka-dazzles-in-golden-bomber-jacket-for-round-2-at-roland-garros-1780034470538">French Open 2026 | Osaka dazzles in 'golden bomber jacket' in Round 2</a><h3>Court criticises WFI remarks</h3>The bench also took exception to remarks made by the WFI in a show-cause notice issued to Phogat, where her disqualification from the Paris Olympics was allegedly referred to as a “national embarrassment.”&nbsp;The court described those comments as “deplorable", “ex-facie misconceived" and “ought to have been avoided".&nbsp;Phogat had challenged the federation’s eligibility criteria, arguing that the qualification timeline overlapped with her pregnancy and post-partum recovery, effectively denying her a fair chance to compete.&nbsp;Earlier this month, the WFI declared her ineligible for domestic tournaments until Jun 26, citing anti-doping rules applicable to athletes returning from retirement. Despite the restriction, she took part in the National Open Ranking Tournament in Gonda.&nbsp;A former World Championships medallist, Vinesh Phogat, was also among the prominent faces of the wrestlers’ protest in 2023 against former WFI chief Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh.&nbsp;In Aug 2024, she suffered heartbreak at the Paris Olympics after being disqualified from the final due to being 100 grams overweight during the official weigh-in on the morning of the bout.&nbsp;With inputs from agencies

The Supreme Court has upheld the Delhi High Court’s order allowing Vinesh Phogat to participate in the Asian Games 2026 selection trials scheduled for May 30 and 31, dismissing the challenge filed by the WFI.

The Supreme Court on Friday (May 29) permitted wrestler Vinesh Phogat to participate in the selection trials for the 2026 Asian Games, scheduled to be held on May 30 and 31. A bench comprising Justices P S Narasimha and Alok Aradhe heard the appeal filed by the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) against the Delhi High Court’s earlier order allowing Phogat to compete. During the hearing, the apex court indicated that preventing her from participating at this stage would be unfair. “Today at this stage, the high court having passed the order, the hope and expectations have risen. To tell her to go back home and we can’t do anything, will not be proper. We are very bold in telling you this," the bench told the counsel appearing for the WFI. The matter has been listed for further hearing next week. WFI’s challenge against Delhi High Court order The legal dispute began after the Delhi High Court granted Vinesh Phogat permission to appear in the Asian Games selection trials. The High Court noted that the WFI’s selection rules did not consider athletes returning after maternity leave and termed the policy restrictive in nature. Also Read - 'Outstanding performance': PM Narendra Modi congratulates U23 wrestlers for historic Asian Championships In its May 22 ruling, the court directed that Phogat be allowed to compete in the trials set for May 30 and 31. It also ordered the entire process to be video-recorded and supervised by independent observers appointed by the Sports Authority of India (SAI) and the Indian Olympic Association (IOA). The High Court stressed that motherhood should not become a disadvantage in the professional careers of women athletes. It further pointed out that earlier selection frameworks had given authorities flexibility to accommodate iconic athletes in exceptional circumstances. Also Read - French Open 2026 | Osaka dazzles in 'golden bomber jacket' in Round 2 Court criticises WFI remarks The bench also took exception to remarks made by the WFI in a show-cause notice issued to Phogat, where her disqualification from the Paris Olympics was allegedly referred to as a “national embarrassment.” The court described those comments as “deplorable", “ex-facie misconceived" and “ought to have been avoided". Phogat had challenged the federation’s eligibility criteria, arguing that the qualification timeline overlapped with her pregnancy and post-partum recovery, effectively denying her a fair chance to compete. Earlier this month, the WFI declared her ineligible for domestic tournaments until Jun 26, citing anti-doping rules applicable to athletes returning from retirement. Despite the restriction, she took part in the National Open Ranking Tournament in Gonda. A former World Championships medallist, Vinesh Phogat, was also among the prominent faces of the wrestlers’ protest in 2023 against former WFI chief Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh. In Aug 2024, she suffered heartbreak at the Paris Olympics after being disqualified from the final due to being 100 grams overweight during the official weigh-in on the morning of the bout. With inputs from agencies

The Supreme Court has upheld the Delhi High Court’s order allowing Vinesh Phogat to participate in the Asian Games 2026 selection trials scheduled for May 30 and 31, dismissing the challenge filed by the WFI.

Vinesh Phogat set for Asian Games trials after Supreme Court upholds Delhi HC order

Pernod Ricard, the French liquor giant behind Absolut Vodka and Chivas Regal, suffered another setback in India on Friday after the Delhi High Court rejected its plea to resume sales in the national capital. The ruling prolongs a ban that has kept some of the company’s most recognisable brands off Delhi shelves since 2023 and intensifies pressure on a business already facing multiple investigations and a $314 million tax dispute.&nbsp;&nbsp;The case has become one of the most closely watched corporate battles in India’s liquor industry, not least because Delhi once accounted for nearly five per cent of Pernod Ricard’s nationwide sales. India, meanwhile, remains the company’s largest market globally by volume, according to Reuters.&nbsp;ALSO READ: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trump-appointees-push-proposal-for-250-us-bill-featuring-his-portrait-report-says-1779971661787">Trump on US dollar bill? Appointees push $250 banknote proposal ahead of 250th anniversary, report says</a><h2>Court Rejects Plea Amid Liquor Policy Investigation</h2>The dispute stems from the now-scrapped 2021 Delhi liquor policy, which has triggered a wide-ranging investigation by federal agencies. Authorities allege that Pernod Ricard colluded with retailers to increase market share in the capital, accusations the company has consistently denied. Delhi authorities have repeatedly refused to renew the company’s licence on the grounds that it is an accused party in the ongoing probe. Pernod Ricard argued before the court that it had not been convicted of any wrongdoing and therefore should not be barred from operating.&nbsp;However, the Delhi High Court sided with city authorities, with the judge observing that the company was “ineligible” for a licence because of the continuing investigation. The ruling effectively keeps Pernod Ricard out of one of India’s most important liquor markets for a third consecutive year. In earlier submissions cited by Reuters, the company argued that repeated denials had left its business “hopelessly fettered” in New Delhi.&nbsp;ALSO READ: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/norway-to-move-under-france-s-nuclear-umbrella-5-reasons-europe-s-defence-calculus-is-shifting-1779965498271">Norway to move under France’s nuclear umbrella: 5 reasons Europe’s defence calculus is shifting</a><h2>Tax Dispute Adds to Pressure</h2>The legal setback comes days after Reuters reported that Indian investigators had accused Pernod Ricard of understating the value of Scotch whisky imports to reduce tariff payments. Authorities allege the company concealed details relating to the age and composition of imported whisky, claims that have led to a demand for $314 million in back taxes.&nbsp;&nbsp;According to a government filing dated January 24 and cited by Reuters on March 27, investigators alleged that Pernod Ricard did not declare “the true description of their imported malts (i.e. its exact composition and age) with the intention to hide the actual value of the imported goods and to avoid comparison”.&nbsp;Pernod Ricard has not publicly commented on Friday’s court ruling. Formed in 1975 through the merger of French spirits makers Pernod and Ricard, the group today controls a vast premium portfolio spanning Chivas Regal, The Glenlivet, Jameson, Ballantine’s, Absolut Vodka and Beefeater gin. In India, it also owns popular Seagram’s whisky labels including Royal Stag and Blenders Pride. For now, however, Delhi consumers hoping to buy Absolut Vodka or Chivas Regal legally in the capital will have to wait longer.

Authorities allege the company concealed details relating to the age and composition of imported whisky, claims that have led to a demand for $314 million in back taxes.

Pernod Ricard, the French liquor giant behind Absolut Vodka and Chivas Regal, suffered another setback in India on Friday after the Delhi High Court rejected its plea to resume sales in the national capital. The ruling prolongs a ban that has kept some of the company’s most recognisable brands off Delhi shelves since 2023 and intensifies pressure on a business already facing multiple investigations and a $314 million tax dispute. The case has become one of the most closely watched corporate battles in India’s liquor industry, not least because Delhi once accounted for nearly five per cent of Pernod Ricard’s nationwide sales. India, meanwhile, remains the company’s largest market globally by volume, according to Reuters. ALSO READ: Trump on US dollar bill? Appointees push $250 banknote proposal ahead of 250th anniversary, report says Court Rejects Plea Amid Liquor Policy Investigation The dispute stems from the now-scrapped 2021 Delhi liquor policy, which has triggered a wide-ranging investigation by federal agencies. Authorities allege that Pernod Ricard colluded with retailers to increase market share in the capital, accusations the company has consistently denied. Delhi authorities have repeatedly refused to renew the company’s licence on the grounds that it is an accused party in the ongoing probe. Pernod Ricard argued before the court that it had not been convicted of any wrongdoing and therefore should not be barred from operating. However, the Delhi High Court sided with city authorities, with the judge observing that the company was “ineligible” for a licence because of the continuing investigation. The ruling effectively keeps Pernod Ricard out of one of India’s most important liquor markets for a third consecutive year. In earlier submissions cited by Reuters, the company argued that repeated denials had left its business “hopelessly fettered” in New Delhi. ALSO READ: Norway to move under France’s nuclear umbrella: 5 reasons Europe’s defence calculus is shifting Tax Dispute Adds to Pressure The legal setback comes days after Reuters reported that Indian investigators had accused Pernod Ricard of understating the value of Scotch whisky imports to reduce tariff payments. Authorities allege the company concealed details relating to the age and composition of imported whisky, claims that have led to a demand for $314 million in back taxes. According to a government filing dated January 24 and cited by Reuters on March 27, investigators alleged that Pernod Ricard did not declare “the true description of their imported malts (i.e. its exact composition and age) with the intention to hide the actual value of the imported goods and to avoid comparison”. Pernod Ricard has not publicly commented on Friday’s court ruling. Formed in 1975 through the merger of French spirits makers Pernod and Ricard, the group today controls a vast premium portfolio spanning Chivas Regal, The Glenlivet, Jameson, Ballantine’s, Absolut Vodka and Beefeater gin. In India, it also owns popular Seagram’s whisky labels including Royal Stag and Blenders Pride. For now, however, Delhi consumers hoping to buy Absolut Vodka or Chivas Regal legally in the capital will have to wait longer.

Authorities allege the company concealed details relating to the age and composition of imported whisky, claims that have led to a demand for $314 million in back taxes.

‘$314 million tax hit, Delhi ban’: HC denies relief to Absolut Vodka maker, calls firm ‘ineligible’ for liquor licence

The Delhi High Court on Friday (May 29) refused to order the immediate restoration of the X account of viral political satire movement Cockroach Janta Party (CJP). While hearing a plea by CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke challenging the blocking of the party's X handle by the government on national security grounds, Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav directed a review panel to examine the matter. &nbsp;<h2>Cockroach Janta Party's X account remains blocked</h2>Hearing the petition, Justice Kaurav directed the Review Committee constituted under India's Information Technology Rules to consider the challenge against the account blocking and place its findings on record.While the Court issued notice to the Union government and social media platform X, it stopped short of granting interim relief sought by Dipke, meaning the account will remain blocked for now.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/india-s-students-deserve-better-cockroach-janata-party-revives-petition-targeting-edu-minister-dharmendra-pradhan-neet-2026-paper-leak-1779774614724">'India’s students deserve better': Cockroach Janata Party revives petition targeting Edu Minister Dharmendra Pradhan</a><h2>Why was Cockroach Janta Party's X account suspended?</h2>The account was reportedly suspended on national security grounds, though neither the petitioner nor the Court has yet been shown the blocking order.Senior Advocate Akhil Sibal, appearing for Dipke, argued that the account should be restored while the case is being heard. He contended that authorities could have adopted a narrower approach by restricting specific objectionable posts rather than blocking the entire account.Sibal also questioned how such an order could have been passed without allowing the account holder to respond.He pointed out that in previous disputes involving blocked social media accounts, courts had sometimes permitted restoration of the account while allowing allegedly objectionable content to remain restricted.Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/trending/cockroach-janata-party-founder-reacts-to-pakistan-followers-claim-says-i-know-you-are-desperately-trying-to-1779436144996">Cockroach Janta Party founder reacts to 'Pakistan followers' claim, says ‘I know you are desperately trying to...’</a>Dipke's legal team also informed the Court that he is currently outside India and requested permission for him to participate in future proceedings before the Review Committee through video conferencing. The Court said such a request could be placed before the committee, which would decide the matter in accordance with law.&nbsp;<h2>GOI argues against account restoration</h2>Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for the Centre opposed Dipke's plea, prompting the Court to reserve a deeper examination of the issues until the government's detailed response is filed. During the hearing, the Court observed that the dispute raises larger legal questions that require careful consideration, particularly because the law governing online content blocking continues to evolve. The Bench also indicated that the present case may differ from earlier matters cited by the petitioner because concerns raised by authorities appear to relate to the overall activities of the account rather than a handful of individual posts.In another significant observation, the Court noted that neither it nor the petitioner had seen the actual blocking order. It added that if necessary, directions regarding production of the complete record could be considered at a later stage.

Delhi High Court declines urgent plea to restore Cockroach Janta Party’s X account. The court has instead asked a review panel to examine the case. But the account remains blocked for now.

What happens next, and why did the judges hold back from granting relief? Scroll down to find out.

The Delhi High Court on Friday (May 29) refused to order the immediate restoration of the X account of viral political satire movement Cockroach Janta Party (CJP). While hearing a plea by CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke challenging the blocking of the party's X handle by the government on national security grounds, Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav directed a review panel to examine the matter. Cockroach Janta Party's X account remains blocked Hearing the petition, Justice Kaurav directed the Review Committee constituted under India's Information Technology Rules to consider the challenge against the account blocking and place its findings on record. While the Court issued notice to the Union government and social media platform X, it stopped short of granting interim relief sought by Dipke, meaning the account will remain blocked for now. Also read | 'India’s students deserve better': Cockroach Janata Party revives petition targeting Edu Minister Dharmendra Pradhan Why was Cockroach Janta Party's X account suspended? The account was reportedly suspended on national security grounds, though neither the petitioner nor the Court has yet been shown the blocking order. Senior Advocate Akhil Sibal, appearing for Dipke, argued that the account should be restored while the case is being heard. He contended that authorities could have adopted a narrower approach by restricting specific objectionable posts rather than blocking the entire account. Sibal also questioned how such an order could have been passed without allowing the account holder to respond. He pointed out that in previous disputes involving blocked social media accounts, courts had sometimes permitted restoration of the account while allowing allegedly objectionable content to remain restricted. Also read | Cockroach Janta Party founder reacts to 'Pakistan followers' claim, says ‘I know you are desperately trying to...’ Dipke's legal team also informed the Court that he is currently outside India and requested permission for him to participate in future proceedings before the Review Committee through video conferencing. The Court said such a request could be placed before the committee, which would decide the matter in accordance with law. GOI argues against account restoration Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing for the Centre opposed Dipke's plea, prompting the Court to reserve a deeper examination of the issues until the government's detailed response is filed. During the hearing, the Court observed that the dispute raises larger legal questions that require careful consideration, particularly because the law governing online content blocking continues to evolve. The Bench also indicated that the present case may differ from earlier matters cited by the petitioner because concerns raised by authorities appear to relate to the overall activities of the account rather than a handful of individual posts. In another significant observation, the Court noted that neither it nor the petitioner had seen the actual blocking order. It added that if necessary, directions regarding production of the complete record could be considered at a later stage.

Delhi High Court declines urgent plea to restore Cockroach Janta Party’s X account. The court has instead asked a review panel to examine the case. But the account remains blocked for now.What happens next, and why did the judges hold back from granting relief? Scroll down to find out.

Cockroach Janta Party's X account to stay blocked: Delhi HC declines to order immediate restoration

The Delhi High Court on Friday (May 22) permitted Olympian wrestler Vinesh Phogat to take part in the Asian Games 2026 selection trials, set to be held on May 30 and 31. Phogat had earlier been ruled ineligible under revised criteria introduced this year by the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI), which differed from the federation’s previous selection norms. In addition, she had been restricted from competing in WFI events until Jun 26 after a show-cause notice was issued to her on May 9.&nbsp;A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed that Phogat should be allowed to compete “in the interest of sport and justice.”&nbsp;“It is necessary that (Phogat) is permitted to participate in the Selection Trials in the interest of sport and justice. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, it is clear that, except for (Phogat’s) motherhood and the SCN issued by WFI, she would be entitled to participate in the Selection Trials. Therefore, the circumstances were beyond her control… it is deemed appropriate to protect the interest of (Phogat) by permitting her to participate in the Selection Trials,” a division bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia held.&nbsp;The court further ordered that the selection trials to be video-recorded and the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports should appoint two independent observers, one each from the Sports Authority of India and the Indian Olympic Association, to oversee the trials and submit their findings to the court.&nbsp;Also Read - <a href="https://www.wionews.com/sports/icc-weighs-major-rule-change-on-red-to-pink-ball-switch-in-tests-reports-1779531971965">ICC weighs major rule change on red to pink ball switch in Tests: Reports</a>&nbsp;Phogat had stepped away from competition in Dec 2024 due to maternity reasons. Although the international wrestling body cleared her eligibility to compete from 1 Jan, 2026, the WFI prevented her participation and through its show-cause notice, accused her of indiscipline while calling her failure to make weight at the 2024 Paris Olympics a “national embarrassment.”&nbsp;The High Court also remarked that the revised selection policy represented a sharp deviation from earlier practices, where the federation had powers to consider prominent athletes for the Asian Games even if they had not met standard participation requirements.&nbsp;“…the Policy and the Circular are clearly exclusionary in nature as it does not give any discretion to (WFI) to consider iconic players like Phogat in view of the sabbatical taken on account of her maternity leave. It is a well-recognised principle of law that due to maternity, a woman cannot be prejudiced in any manner in terms of her employment, career, ranking and promotion during the period of maternity leave,” the bench reiterated.&nbsp;Also Read - <a href="https://www.wionews.com/sports/ipl-2026-big-blow-for-lsg-as-star-batter-set-to-miss-pbks-clash-1779525664989">IPL 2026: Big blow for LSG as star batter set to miss PBKS clash</a>&nbsp;In its order, released publicly on Saturday, the court also criticised the WFI’s remarks regarding Phogat’s Paris Olympics campaign. The bench observed that such comments were inappropriate, especially after the Court of Arbitration for Sport had already ruled that there was no wrongdoing on her part.&nbsp;&nbsp;“Such observations made in the SCN despite the Award issued by CAS, which clearly held that there was no wrongdoing on her part, appear to be pre-mediated and are ex facie misconceived and ought to have been avoided. Such observations are retrograde and show the malafide intent of (WFI) by being vindictive against (Phogat),” the bench observed.&nbsp;“In the present case, (Phogat’s) exclusion from the Selection Trials is directly attributable to the sabbatical and temporary retirement from her sporting activities. The duration of her maternity and recovery from the same coincided with the schedule of the Championships, which were required to be participated in for meeting the eligibility criteria for the Selection Trials of the Asian Games, 2026, in accordance with the Policy and the Circular,” the bench said.&nbsp;The bench also recorded that Phogat had informed the International Testing Agency, United World Wrestling and the Sports Authority of India about her sabbatical and had received confirmation on 3 Jul, 2025, that she would be eligible to compete again from 1 Jan, 2026.

The Delhi High Court strongly criticised the Wrestling Federation of India for its vindictive approach towards wrestler Vinesh Phogat and permitted her to participate in the Asian Games selection trials despite the WFI declaring her ineligible.

The Delhi High Court on Friday (May 22) permitted Olympian wrestler Vinesh Phogat to take part in the Asian Games 2026 selection trials, set to be held on May 30 and 31. Phogat had earlier been ruled ineligible under revised criteria introduced this year by the Wrestling Federation of India (WFI), which differed from the federation’s previous selection norms. In addition, she had been restricted from competing in WFI events until Jun 26 after a show-cause notice was issued to her on May 9. A division bench comprising Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia observed that Phogat should be allowed to compete “in the interest of sport and justice.” “It is necessary that (Phogat) is permitted to participate in the Selection Trials in the interest of sport and justice. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, it is clear that, except for (Phogat’s) motherhood and the SCN issued by WFI, she would be entitled to participate in the Selection Trials. Therefore, the circumstances were beyond her control… it is deemed appropriate to protect the interest of (Phogat) by permitting her to participate in the Selection Trials,” a division bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia held. The court further ordered that the selection trials to be video-recorded and the Ministry of Youth Affairs and Sports should appoint two independent observers, one each from the Sports Authority of India and the Indian Olympic Association, to oversee the trials and submit their findings to the court. Also Read - ICC weighs major rule change on red to pink ball switch in Tests: Reports Phogat had stepped away from competition in Dec 2024 due to maternity reasons. Although the international wrestling body cleared her eligibility to compete from 1 Jan, 2026, the WFI prevented her participation and through its show-cause notice, accused her of indiscipline while calling her failure to make weight at the 2024 Paris Olympics a “national embarrassment.” The High Court also remarked that the revised selection policy represented a sharp deviation from earlier practices, where the federation had powers to consider prominent athletes for the Asian Games even if they had not met standard participation requirements. “…the Policy and the Circular are clearly exclusionary in nature as it does not give any discretion to (WFI) to consider iconic players like Phogat in view of the sabbatical taken on account of her maternity leave. It is a well-recognised principle of law that due to maternity, a woman cannot be prejudiced in any manner in terms of her employment, career, ranking and promotion during the period of maternity leave,” the bench reiterated. Also Read - IPL 2026: Big blow for LSG as star batter set to miss PBKS clash In its order, released publicly on Saturday, the court also criticised the WFI’s remarks regarding Phogat’s Paris Olympics campaign. The bench observed that such comments were inappropriate, especially after the Court of Arbitration for Sport had already ruled that there was no wrongdoing on her part. “Such observations made in the SCN despite the Award issued by CAS, which clearly held that there was no wrongdoing on her part, appear to be pre-mediated and are ex facie misconceived and ought to have been avoided. Such observations are retrograde and show the malafide intent of (WFI) by being vindictive against (Phogat),” the bench observed. “In the present case, (Phogat’s) exclusion from the Selection Trials is directly attributable to the sabbatical and temporary retirement from her sporting activities. The duration of her maternity and recovery from the same coincided with the schedule of the Championships, which were required to be participated in for meeting the eligibility criteria for the Selection Trials of the Asian Games, 2026, in accordance with the Policy and the Circular,” the bench said. The bench also recorded that Phogat had informed the International Testing Agency, United World Wrestling and the Sports Authority of India about her sabbatical and had received confirmation on 3 Jul, 2025, that she would be eligible to compete again from 1 Jan, 2026.

The Delhi High Court strongly criticised the Wrestling Federation of India for its vindictive approach towards wrestler Vinesh Phogat and permitted her to participate in the Asian Games selection trials despite the WFI declaring her ineligible.

Delhi High Court clears wrestler Vinesh Phogat for Asian Games selection trials

Virtual proceedings before Delhi High Court Chief Justice's Court were disturbed on Wednesday (Apr 29) as pornographic content was played by a user midway on hearing. The incident occurred before a division bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia. Th incident unfolded when a random user logged in as “Shitjeet Sighn” on VC shared his screen and played pornographic content on video conferencing. Despite the VC being shut down by the Court staff, the same user shared the screen and displayed pornographic content at least three times.&nbsp;<h2>What was the incident?</h2>The first disruption took place around 12.56pm, after which the VC session was briefly suspended. After the video was shut for the first time, the user again played it after few minutes, forcing a longer suspension of the proceedings. When the VC restarted the third time, the screen initially remained blank before becoming visible to participants. However, shortly thereafter, the user played pornographic content again. This times the VC was shut down entirely and resumed only after the court reconvened post-lunch around 2.30pm.<h2>What action was taken?</h2>Following this incident, the VC proceedings were shut down entirely and resumed only after the court reconvened post-lunch around 2.30pm. The Delhi High Court administration lodged a complaint with the Delhi Police’s Intelligence Fusion and Strategic Operations unit (IFSO), according to reports. According to a report by LiveLaw, &nbsp;a voice in the background, “This is a hack from the United States. Shut the meeting right now. Never turn it on again. You have been hacked.”&nbsp;&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/-slave-manuels-sex-toys-porn-mags-vhs-tapes-nude-photos-items-in-epstein-s-secret-storage-locker-revealed-1772021164499">‘Slave manuals’, sex toys, porn mags, VHS tapes, nude photos: Items in Epstein's secret storage locker REVEALED</a>&nbsp;The chief justice also issued administrative directions to registrar general Arun Bharadwaj to take action to restrain the dissemination of videos of court proceedings, including pornographic content. The chief justice said that, under the rules, recording court proceedings is prohibited. “Administratively, I have already instructed the RG. We are making a request with the mechanism available for that. As per the rules, the recording is prohibited. It’s against the rules and as per the norms, I have already instructed the RG, and it will be done,” the chief justice said.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/trending/porn-blocked-multi-billion-dollar-us-adult-entertainment-industry-faces-moment-of-reckoning-as-more-states-introduce-age-verification-1759222680425">Porn blocked: Multi-billion dollar US adult entertainment industry faces moment of reckoning as more states introduce age verification</a>

This came after additional solicitor general Chetan Sharma mentioned the issue in the post-lunch session before a bench of chief justice Upadhyaya and justice Tejas Karia, informing the court that the incident had occurred not only in the chief justice’s court but in other courts as well. He submitted that it had affected the sanctity and integrity of the institution and urged the court to direct immediate removal of the content and prevent its further dissemination.&nbsp;

Virtual hearings at the Delhi High Court were disrupted after an unidentified user played obscene content multiple times. Proceedings were suspended, and an investigation was launched. Authorities raised concerns over cybersecurity and court integrity.

Virtual proceedings before Delhi High Court Chief Justice's Court were disturbed on Wednesday (Apr 29) as pornographic content was played by a user midway on hearing. The incident occurred before a division bench comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia. Th incident unfolded when a random user logged in as “Shitjeet Sighn” on VC shared his screen and played pornographic content on video conferencing. Despite the VC being shut down by the Court staff, the same user shared the screen and displayed pornographic content at least three times. What was the incident? The first disruption took place around 12.56pm, after which the VC session was briefly suspended. After the video was shut for the first time, the user again played it after few minutes, forcing a longer suspension of the proceedings. When the VC restarted the third time, the screen initially remained blank before becoming visible to participants. However, shortly thereafter, the user played pornographic content again. This times the VC was shut down entirely and resumed only after the court reconvened post-lunch around 2.30pm. What action was taken? Following this incident, the VC proceedings were shut down entirely and resumed only after the court reconvened post-lunch around 2.30pm. The Delhi High Court administration lodged a complaint with the Delhi Police’s Intelligence Fusion and Strategic Operations unit (IFSO), according to reports. According to a report by LiveLaw, a voice in the background, “This is a hack from the United States. Shut the meeting right now. Never turn it on again. You have been hacked.” Also Read: ‘Slave manuals’, sex toys, porn mags, VHS tapes, nude photos: Items in Epstein's secret storage locker REVEALED The chief justice also issued administrative directions to registrar general Arun Bharadwaj to take action to restrain the dissemination of videos of court proceedings, including pornographic content. The chief justice said that, under the rules, recording court proceedings is prohibited. “Administratively, I have already instructed the RG. We are making a request with the mechanism available for that. As per the rules, the recording is prohibited. It’s against the rules and as per the norms, I have already instructed the RG, and it will be done,” the chief justice said. Also Read: Porn blocked: Multi-billion dollar US adult entertainment industry faces moment of reckoning as more states introduce age verification

Virtual hearings at the Delhi High Court were disrupted after an unidentified user played obscene content multiple times. Proceedings were suspended, and an investigation was launched. Authorities raised concerns over cybersecurity and court integrity.

'Hack from US': Porn clip plays three times during virtual hearing in Delhi High Court

Amid the LPG shortage in India, services at Lawyers' Canteen at the Delhi High Court have temporarily stopped. The unavailability of the LPG gas cylinders has led to this situation. As reported by news agency ANI, a notice issued by Sandeep Sharma of the Lawyers' Canteen that the kitchen is currently unable to cook main course items. It is highlighted that it is due to the ongoing shortage of LPG gas supply. The notice was addressed to the Secretary of the court and all advocates.&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-iran-war-trump-warns-iran-against-mining-in-strait-of-hormuz-1773223176374/embed">https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-iran-war-trump-warns-iran-against-mining-in-strait-of-hormuz-1773223176374/embed</a>&nbsp; The notice stated that the canteen management does not have any information at present about when the LPG supply will be restored. It further mentioned that the preparation of main course food items will resume once the gas supply becomes available again.&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/strait-of-hormuz-blockade-why-india-s-hospitality-sector-is-facing-a-severe-lpg-shortage-1773196974264">Strait of Hormuz Blockade: Why India’s hospitality sector is facing a severe LPG shortage</a>&nbsp;However, the canteen clarified that other food items that do not require cooking on LPG will continue to be served. These include sandwiches, salads, fruit chaat and similar refreshments. The management also expressed regret for the inconvenience caused to advocates and visitors and sought their understanding and cooperation until normal services resume. Amid the West Asia conflict, the Centre had announced a price hike of Rs 60 for cooking LPG cylinders on March 7. Following the hike, the non-subsidised prices of LPG cylinders stand at Rs 913 in Delhi, Rs 939 in Kolkata, Rs 912 in Mumbai, and Rs 928 in Chennai. The difference in prices across state comes from the applicable taxes levied by state government. Amid fears of a disruption over the shortage of LPG gas, the consumers in Uttar Pradesh also lined up outside gas agencies from early morning, looking to get a fresh stock of cylinders for their home cooking needs.&nbsp;&nbsp;One buyer, Ajay Nishad, stated that this stressful situation has persisted for the past ten days. He noted that approximately 400 to 500 people have lined up outside the gas agencies. Amid the supply disruption, the Central government has mandated a new 25-day inter-booking period for domestic LPG refills. The shortage of LPG has emerged amid global energy supply disruptions triggered by the ongoing conflict in West Asia. In response, the Union government has invoked the Essential Commodities Act to prioritise domestic LPG supply, reserving higher allocations for households, hospitals, and essential services while restricting commercial distribution in several regions.&nbsp;&nbsp;The Union Petroleum Ministry has stated that the invocation of the Act has established a clear priority list for natural gas distribution to manage current supply constraints. Under this new mandate, there is a 100 per cent assured supply of domestic piped gas for homes and CNG for vehicles. Other sectors will face calibrated supply caps based on their previous six-month average consumption. These measures come as India, which typically sources 30 per cent of its natural gas via the Strait of Hormuz, navigates the logistical challenges posed by the regional conflict.&nbsp;(With agency inputs)

The Delhi High Court Lawyers' Canteen halts main course service due to a severe LPG shortage. No definitive timeline for restoration as West Asia war hits supply.

Amid the LPG shortage in India, services at Lawyers' Canteen at the Delhi High Court have temporarily stopped. The unavailability of the LPG gas cylinders has led to this situation. As reported by news agency ANI, a notice issued by Sandeep Sharma of the Lawyers' Canteen that the kitchen is currently unable to cook main course items. It is highlighted that it is due to the ongoing shortage of LPG gas supply. The notice was addressed to the Secretary of the court and all advocates. https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-iran-war-trump-warns-iran-against-mining-in-strait-of-hormuz-1773223176374/embed The notice stated that the canteen management does not have any information at present about when the LPG supply will be restored. It further mentioned that the preparation of main course food items will resume once the gas supply becomes available again. Also read: Strait of Hormuz Blockade: Why India’s hospitality sector is facing a severe LPG shortage However, the canteen clarified that other food items that do not require cooking on LPG will continue to be served. These include sandwiches, salads, fruit chaat and similar refreshments. The management also expressed regret for the inconvenience caused to advocates and visitors and sought their understanding and cooperation until normal services resume. Amid the West Asia conflict, the Centre had announced a price hike of Rs 60 for cooking LPG cylinders on March 7. Following the hike, the non-subsidised prices of LPG cylinders stand at Rs 913 in Delhi, Rs 939 in Kolkata, Rs 912 in Mumbai, and Rs 928 in Chennai. The difference in prices across state comes from the applicable taxes levied by state government. Amid fears of a disruption over the shortage of LPG gas, the consumers in Uttar Pradesh also lined up outside gas agencies from early morning, looking to get a fresh stock of cylinders for their home cooking needs. One buyer, Ajay Nishad, stated that this stressful situation has persisted for the past ten days. He noted that approximately 400 to 500 people have lined up outside the gas agencies. Amid the supply disruption, the Central government has mandated a new 25-day inter-booking period for domestic LPG refills. The shortage of LPG has emerged amid global energy supply disruptions triggered by the ongoing conflict in West Asia. In response, the Union government has invoked the Essential Commodities Act to prioritise domestic LPG supply, reserving higher allocations for households, hospitals, and essential services while restricting commercial distribution in several regions. The Union Petroleum Ministry has stated that the invocation of the Act has established a clear priority list for natural gas distribution to manage current supply constraints. Under this new mandate, there is a 100 per cent assured supply of domestic piped gas for homes and CNG for vehicles. Other sectors will face calibrated supply caps based on their previous six-month average consumption. These measures come as India, which typically sources 30 per cent of its natural gas via the Strait of Hormuz, navigates the logistical challenges posed by the regional conflict. (With agency inputs)

The Delhi High Court Lawyers' Canteen halts main course service due to a severe LPG shortage. No definitive timeline for restoration as West Asia war hits supply.

LPG crisis hits Delhi High Court: Lawyers' Canteen stops serving hot meals amid shortage

The Delhi High Court on Monday (Jan 19) refused to suspend the 10-year rigorous imprisonment imposed on Former BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar in a case related to the custodial death of the father of the Unnao rape case survivor. &nbsp;“No grounds are made out for grant relief. The application seeking suspension of sentence is dismissed,” said Justice Ravinder Dudeja.&nbsp;The court noted that while Sengar had served a long incarceration of about 7.5 years, relief can not be provided on grounds of delay, partly because he has filed multiple applications in his appeal against his conviction.&nbsp;Sengar has been in custody since April 13, 2018, and is serving a 10-year jail term in the custodial death case, apart from a life sentence in the minor rape case.&nbsp;On March 13, 2020, Sengar was awarded 10 years of rigorous imprisonment by a trial court along with a fine of Rs 10 lakh, in the case of the custodial death of surviover's father.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/-100-billion-tariffs-on-us-goods-that-s-what-europe-is-planning-in-retaliation-for-trump-s-greenland-tariff-threat-there-could-be-more-1768810563212">$100 billion tariffs on US goods: That’s what Europe is planning in retaliation for Trump's Greenland tariff threat. There could be more...</a>&nbsp;On December 29, the Supreme Court stayed an order ofthe &nbsp;Delhi High Court which granted bail to Kuldeep Singh Sengar in the 2017 Unnao rape case. A vacation bench led by CJI Surya Kant heard the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) plea challenging the Delhi HC order suspending the life sentence awarded to the former Uttar Pradesh MLA. After the order, the Delhi High Court faced massive backlash with the victim's side alleging that the investigating officer (IO) colluded with a judge to ensure the accused side wins.<h2>What is Unnao rape case?</h2> The Unnao rape case refers to the 2017 abduction and rape of a 17-year-old minor girl in the Unnao district of Uttar Pradesh, India, by Kuldeep Singh Sengar, a then-sitting Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Despite reporting the crime, local police initially refused to name Sengar in the First Information Report (FIR).&nbsp;&nbsp;In April 2018, the survivor attempted to self-immolate outside the residence of Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, to protest police inaction. Shortly after, her father died in judicial custody following an assault by Sengar’s brother and associates. In 2019, when the hearing of the case was going on, a truck with blackened license plates rammed into the survivor’s car while she was travelling to court. Two of her aunts were killed, and the survivor was critically injured.

The court noted that while Sengar had served a long incarceration of about 7.5 years, relief can not be provided on grounds of delay, partly because he has filed multiple applications in his appeal against his conviction.



The Delhi High Court on Monday (Jan 19) refused to suspend the 10-year rigorous imprisonment imposed on Former BJP MLA Kuldeep Singh Sengar in a case related to the custodial death of the father of the Unnao rape case survivor. “No grounds are made out for grant relief. The application seeking suspension of sentence is dismissed,” said Justice Ravinder Dudeja. The court noted that while Sengar had served a long incarceration of about 7.5 years, relief can not be provided on grounds of delay, partly because he has filed multiple applications in his appeal against his conviction. Sengar has been in custody since April 13, 2018, and is serving a 10-year jail term in the custodial death case, apart from a life sentence in the minor rape case. On March 13, 2020, Sengar was awarded 10 years of rigorous imprisonment by a trial court along with a fine of Rs 10 lakh, in the case of the custodial death of surviover's father. Also Read: $100 billion tariffs on US goods: That’s what Europe is planning in retaliation for Trump's Greenland tariff threat. There could be more... On December 29, the Supreme Court stayed an order ofthe Delhi High Court which granted bail to Kuldeep Singh Sengar in the 2017 Unnao rape case. A vacation bench led by CJI Surya Kant heard the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) plea challenging the Delhi HC order suspending the life sentence awarded to the former Uttar Pradesh MLA. After the order, the Delhi High Court faced massive backlash with the victim's side alleging that the investigating officer (IO) colluded with a judge to ensure the accused side wins. What is Unnao rape case? The Unnao rape case refers to the 2017 abduction and rape of a 17-year-old minor girl in the Unnao district of Uttar Pradesh, India, by Kuldeep Singh Sengar, a then-sitting Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Despite reporting the crime, local police initially refused to name Sengar in the First Information Report (FIR). In April 2018, the survivor attempted to self-immolate outside the residence of Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, to protest police inaction. Shortly after, her father died in judicial custody following an assault by Sengar’s brother and associates. In 2019, when the hearing of the case was going on, a truck with blackened license plates rammed into the survivor’s car while she was travelling to court. Two of her aunts were killed, and the survivor was critically injured.

The court noted that while Sengar had served a long incarceration of about 7.5 years, relief can not be provided on grounds of delay, partly because he has filed multiple applications in his appeal against his conviction.

Unnao rape case: Delhi HC rejects Kuldeep Sengar's plea to suspend 10-year sentence in custodial death case

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday issued notice on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking coercive action against Regulated Entities (REs), Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) and Lending Service Providers (LSPs operating digital lending applications), allegedly found to be in breach of the Reserve Bank of India's Digital Lending Guidelines.&nbsp;A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia sought responses from the Union Government, the RBI, Google LLC and Apple India Private Limited on the issues raised in the petition. The PIL raises serious concerns regarding alleged violations of borrowers' fundamental right to privacy and to data protection by several NBFC-backed Digital Lending Applications (DLAs) operating in India.&nbsp;The petitioner Himakshi Bharghav contends that, despite the RBI's binding Digital Lending Guidelines issued on May 8, 2025, multiple platforms continue to access prohibited mobile phone resources, such as contact lists and call logs; collect excessive personal and device-level data; and employ coercive, blanket consent mechanisms.&nbsp;According to the plea, the petitioner, a public-spirited student, approached the High Court in public interest to safeguard the privacy and data rights of digital borrowers across the country, particularly students, first-time borrowers, gig workers and economically vulnerable sections.&nbsp;The RBI's revised guidelines, the petition notes, expressly prohibit DLAs from accessing telephony functions and sensitive phone data, allowing only limited, one-time access to features such as the camera, microphone, or location, strictly for onboarding and KYC purposes, subject to explicit consent. The petition alleges that these safeguards are being routinely flouted.&nbsp;The plea further states that upon examining digital lending applications available on major app platforms, several NBFC-backed apps, including Slice, Branch, Navi, Home Credit, Simpl, Dhani, Refyne, ZestMoney, FreePay and LendingPlate, were found to allegedly continue accessing borrowers' contacts and call logs and collecting data far beyond what is necessary for legitimate lending purposes.&nbsp;Such practices, it is argued, render consent involuntary because users are compelled to accept broad, non-negotiable privacy policies to access credit. The PIL also points out that a detailed complaint, supported by documentary evidence, was submitted to the RBI on November 18, 2025, identifying specific violations of the Digital Lending Guidelines. Despite this, the petition claims that no effective enforcement action or public response has been taken, thereby allowing the impugned applications to continue operating on major app platforms.&nbsp;Placing reliance on the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in K.S. Puttaswamy (Privacy-9J.) v. Union of India, the petitioner contends that the alleged data collection practices violate Article 21 of the Constitution and fail the proportionality test, having no reasonable nexus with legitimate objectives such as KYC or credit assessment. It is argued that the RBI's alleged inaction amounts to a failure to discharge its statutory and constitutional duties and results in unequal protection under Article 14.&nbsp;Terming the injury as widespread, continuous and incapable of individual redress, the petitioner has urged the Delhi High Court to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 and issue appropriate directions to curb ongoing privacy violations by digital lending platforms and ensure effective enforcement of the RBI's Digital Lending Guidelines in the larger public interest.&nbsp;Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

The PIL raises serious concerns regarding alleged violations of borrowers' fundamental right to privacy and to data protection by several NBFC-backed Digital Lending Applications (DLAs) operating in India.

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday issued notice on a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking coercive action against Regulated Entities (REs), Non-Banking Financial Companies (NBFCs) and Lending Service Providers (LSPs operating digital lending applications), allegedly found to be in breach of the Reserve Bank of India's Digital Lending Guidelines. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia sought responses from the Union Government, the RBI, Google LLC and Apple India Private Limited on the issues raised in the petition. The PIL raises serious concerns regarding alleged violations of borrowers' fundamental right to privacy and to data protection by several NBFC-backed Digital Lending Applications (DLAs) operating in India. The petitioner Himakshi Bharghav contends that, despite the RBI's binding Digital Lending Guidelines issued on May 8, 2025, multiple platforms continue to access prohibited mobile phone resources, such as contact lists and call logs; collect excessive personal and device-level data; and employ coercive, blanket consent mechanisms. According to the plea, the petitioner, a public-spirited student, approached the High Court in public interest to safeguard the privacy and data rights of digital borrowers across the country, particularly students, first-time borrowers, gig workers and economically vulnerable sections. The RBI's revised guidelines, the petition notes, expressly prohibit DLAs from accessing telephony functions and sensitive phone data, allowing only limited, one-time access to features such as the camera, microphone, or location, strictly for onboarding and KYC purposes, subject to explicit consent. The petition alleges that these safeguards are being routinely flouted. The plea further states that upon examining digital lending applications available on major app platforms, several NBFC-backed apps, including Slice, Branch, Navi, Home Credit, Simpl, Dhani, Refyne, ZestMoney, FreePay and LendingPlate, were found to allegedly continue accessing borrowers' contacts and call logs and collecting data far beyond what is necessary for legitimate lending purposes. Such practices, it is argued, render consent involuntary because users are compelled to accept broad, non-negotiable privacy policies to access credit. The PIL also points out that a detailed complaint, supported by documentary evidence, was submitted to the RBI on November 18, 2025, identifying specific violations of the Digital Lending Guidelines. Despite this, the petition claims that no effective enforcement action or public response has been taken, thereby allowing the impugned applications to continue operating on major app platforms. Placing reliance on the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in K.S. Puttaswamy (Privacy-9J.) v. Union of India, the petitioner contends that the alleged data collection practices violate Article 21 of the Constitution and fail the proportionality test, having no reasonable nexus with legitimate objectives such as KYC or credit assessment. It is argued that the RBI's alleged inaction amounts to a failure to discharge its statutory and constitutional duties and results in unequal protection under Article 14. Terming the injury as widespread, continuous and incapable of individual redress, the petitioner has urged the Delhi High Court to exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 and issue appropriate directions to curb ongoing privacy violations by digital lending platforms and ensure effective enforcement of the RBI's Digital Lending Guidelines in the larger public interest. Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits to adhere to WION's style guide. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

The PIL raises serious concerns regarding alleged violations of borrowers' fundamental right to privacy and to data protection by several NBFC-backed Digital Lending Applications (DLAs) operating in India.

Delhi High Court issues notice on PIL over data privacy violations by digital lending apps

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has approached the Supreme Court to challenge the Delhi High Court's recent decision to suspend the sentence of Kuldeep Singh Sengar, a convict in the Unnao rape case. On December 16, the agency filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the High Court's ruling that granted bail to Sengar.&nbsp;The Delhi High Court, in a decision made by Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, suspended the sentence and released the former Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader on bail, requiring him to furnish a bond of ₹15 lakh. Sengar had been sentenced to life imprisonment in December 2019 after being convicted for the rape of a 17-year-old girl in Unnao, Uttar Pradesh, in 2017. The Delhi High Court suspended his life sentence, citing that Sengar had already served more time than the maximum sentence allowed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/-thy-name-is-lynchistaan-tweets-mehbooba-mufti-s-daughter-iltija-stirs-controversy-1766764386435">‘Thy name is Lynchistaan,’ tweets Mehbooba Mufti’s daughter Iltija, stirs controversy</a>&nbsp;The High Court's decision sparked protests outside its premises on Friday (December 26), as demonstrators voiced strong opposition to granting bail to Sengar. Among them, the victim's mother expressed her anger, saying, "His bail should be rejected. We will appeal to the Supreme Court. We have lost faith in the High Court... If we don’t get justice there, we will look for it elsewhere. The man responsible for my husband's death should face the death penalty."&nbsp;Footage shared by the news agency ANI showed security forces urging protesters to disperse immediately, warning that legal action would be taken if they failed to leave within five minutes. Women’s rights activist Yogita Bhayana, who was at the protest, said, “Women all over India are deeply distressed by the court’s decision to overturn the conviction of a rapist. This same court is where the injustice occurred, so we will seek justice right here.”

Unnao rape case: CBI challenges Delhi High Court’s bail order for convict Kuldeep Sengar

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has approached the Supreme Court to challenge the Delhi High Court's recent decision to suspend the sentence of Kuldeep Singh Sengar, a convict in the Unnao rape case. On December 16, the agency filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the High Court's ruling that granted bail to Sengar. The Delhi High Court, in a decision made by Justice Subramonium Prasad and Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar, suspended the sentence and released the former Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader on bail, requiring him to furnish a bond of ₹15 lakh. Sengar had been sentenced to life imprisonment in December 2019 after being convicted for the rape of a 17-year-old girl in Unnao, Uttar Pradesh, in 2017. The Delhi High Court suspended his life sentence, citing that Sengar had already served more time than the maximum sentence allowed under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act. Also Read: ‘Thy name is Lynchistaan,’ tweets Mehbooba Mufti’s daughter Iltija, stirs controversy The High Court's decision sparked protests outside its premises on Friday (December 26), as demonstrators voiced strong opposition to granting bail to Sengar. Among them, the victim's mother expressed her anger, saying, "His bail should be rejected. We will appeal to the Supreme Court. We have lost faith in the High Court... If we don’t get justice there, we will look for it elsewhere. The man responsible for my husband's death should face the death penalty." Footage shared by the news agency ANI showed security forces urging protesters to disperse immediately, warning that legal action would be taken if they failed to leave within five minutes. Women’s rights activist Yogita Bhayana, who was at the protest, said, “Women all over India are deeply distressed by the court’s decision to overturn the conviction of a rapist. This same court is where the injustice occurred, so we will seek justice right here.”

The CBI has filed an appeal in the Supreme Court challenging the Delhi High Court's decision to grant bail to Kuldeep Sengar, convicted in the Unnao rape case

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (December 24) expressed its frustration with the government's failure to reduce the Goods and Services Tax (GST) on air purifiers, despite the severe air pollution crisis in the city. The court sharply questioned why air purifiers continue to be taxed at the highest slab of 18%, even as the air quality in Delhi reaches hazardous levels, endangering the health of its residents. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by advocate Kapil Madan.&nbsp;&nbsp;The petition calls for the reclassification of air purifiers as medical devices, which would bring them under the lower 5% GST rate. The PIL argues that air purifiers, which are essential for breathing clean air, should not be considered luxury items. The petition says that access to air purifiers has become indispensable for health and survival, especially for people with respiratory conditions, children, and the elderly. According to the petition, the 18% GST is placing an unnecessary financial burden on the public, making it harder for people to afford devices that are crucial for mitigating the life-threatening effects of air pollution.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/trending/jamia-suspends-professor-over-atrocities-against-muslims-question-in-semester-exam-1766567626181">Jamia suspends professor over 'atrocities against Muslims' question in semester exam</a>&nbsp;In a sharp rebuke, the Delhi High Court questioned the government’s request for more time to respond to the issue. The bench remarked, “What is ‘in due time’? When thousands of people die?” highlighting the urgency of the matter. The judges emphasised that the government had failed to provide citizens with clean air, despite the ongoing pollution crisis. “The least you can do is give them access to air purifiers,” they added. The court further suggested that the government consider exempting air purifiers from GST temporarily, under the National Security Act, to address the current air emergency.&nbsp;The judges made it clear that the government could not continue to delay action on this pressing issue. They asked the government counsel to seek instructions from the authorities and present a concrete proposal on the matter by 2:30 pm on the same day. In its ruling, the court has urged the government to consider the health implications of continuing to tax essential air purifiers at a high rate, especially in light of the ongoing pollution emergency in Delhi. The judges pointed out that the imposition of high taxes on these life-saving devices was a clear violation of the principle of fairness and justice, particularly when the government has failed to ensure adequate air quality.

Delhi High Court questions why air purifiers continue to attract 18% GST during pollution crisis, urging the government to reduce the tax or reclassify them as medical devices

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (December 24) expressed its frustration with the government's failure to reduce the Goods and Services Tax (GST) on air purifiers, despite the severe air pollution crisis in the city. The court sharply questioned why air purifiers continue to be taxed at the highest slab of 18%, even as the air quality in Delhi reaches hazardous levels, endangering the health of its residents. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by advocate Kapil Madan. The petition calls for the reclassification of air purifiers as medical devices, which would bring them under the lower 5% GST rate. The PIL argues that air purifiers, which are essential for breathing clean air, should not be considered luxury items. The petition says that access to air purifiers has become indispensable for health and survival, especially for people with respiratory conditions, children, and the elderly. According to the petition, the 18% GST is placing an unnecessary financial burden on the public, making it harder for people to afford devices that are crucial for mitigating the life-threatening effects of air pollution. Also Read: Jamia suspends professor over 'atrocities against Muslims' question in semester exam In a sharp rebuke, the Delhi High Court questioned the government’s request for more time to respond to the issue. The bench remarked, “What is ‘in due time’? When thousands of people die?” highlighting the urgency of the matter. The judges emphasised that the government had failed to provide citizens with clean air, despite the ongoing pollution crisis. “The least you can do is give them access to air purifiers,” they added. The court further suggested that the government consider exempting air purifiers from GST temporarily, under the National Security Act, to address the current air emergency. The judges made it clear that the government could not continue to delay action on this pressing issue. They asked the government counsel to seek instructions from the authorities and present a concrete proposal on the matter by 2:30 pm on the same day. In its ruling, the court has urged the government to consider the health implications of continuing to tax essential air purifiers at a high rate, especially in light of the ongoing pollution emergency in Delhi. The judges pointed out that the imposition of high taxes on these life-saving devices was a clear violation of the principle of fairness and justice, particularly when the government has failed to ensure adequate air quality.

Delhi High Court questions why air purifiers continue to attract 18% GST during pollution crisis, urging the government to reduce the tax or reclassify them as medical devices

'We breathe 21,000 times a day, calculate the harm': Delhi High Court questions government over 18% GST on air purifiers amid pollution crisis

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday (Dec 23) ordered Meta, X Corp and several other e-commerce platforms to remove social media posts allegedly infringing online content relating to Former Indian captain and Cricket legend Sunil Gavaskar, along with unauthorised merchandise selling and false quotations attributed to him. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora reviewed a detailed list of URLs that allegedly continue to post infringing material despite earlier directions.&nbsp;The court instructed that Meta and X users remove the infringing URLs within 72 hours. If they fail to do so, the platform itself must take down the content. A similar direction was issued to X Corp. E-commerce sellers were also instructed to remove listings that misuse Gavaskar’s name to sell products. During the previous hearing, the court had asked Gavaskar to provide the offending URLs to Google, Meta and X, directing them to act on his takedown request within a week.&nbsp;Senior Advocate Gopal Jain, appearing for Gavaskar, also drew the Court's attention to certain online posts containing obscene content involving the former cricketer. While observing that humour and satire have their own space on social media, the Court nevertheless proceeded to focus on content that prima facie infringes Gavaskar's personality and publicity rights.<h2>Background of the case</h2>In his plea, Gavaskar drew attention to the unauthorised use of his identity, including fabricated critical remarks falsely attributed to him about the Indian men’s cricket team coach Gautam Gambhir and other players. He also pointed to fake comments allegedly made by him about Virat Kohli.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/epstein-files-justice-department-releases-8-000-documents-following-legal-pressure-1766486736519">Epstein Files: US Justice department releases 8,000+ new documents following legal pressure</a>&nbsp;His counsel argued that the circulation of such false quotes could harm Gavaskar’s reputation and credibility as a broadcaster and cricket commentator.&nbsp;The suit further flagged the online sale of counterfeit autographed merchandise and photographs, for which people were being charged despite the items having no genuine link to Gavaskar, the report said.

The court instructed that Meta and X users remove the infringing URLs within 72 hours. If they fail to do so, the platform itself must take down the content.

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday (Dec 23) ordered Meta, X Corp and several other e-commerce platforms to remove social media posts allegedly infringing online content relating to Former Indian captain and Cricket legend Sunil Gavaskar, along with unauthorised merchandise selling and false quotations attributed to him. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora reviewed a detailed list of URLs that allegedly continue to post infringing material despite earlier directions. The court instructed that Meta and X users remove the infringing URLs within 72 hours. If they fail to do so, the platform itself must take down the content. A similar direction was issued to X Corp. E-commerce sellers were also instructed to remove listings that misuse Gavaskar’s name to sell products. During the previous hearing, the court had asked Gavaskar to provide the offending URLs to Google, Meta and X, directing them to act on his takedown request within a week. Senior Advocate Gopal Jain, appearing for Gavaskar, also drew the Court's attention to certain online posts containing obscene content involving the former cricketer. While observing that humour and satire have their own space on social media, the Court nevertheless proceeded to focus on content that prima facie infringes Gavaskar's personality and publicity rights. Background of the case In his plea, Gavaskar drew attention to the unauthorised use of his identity, including fabricated critical remarks falsely attributed to him about the Indian men’s cricket team coach Gautam Gambhir and other players. He also pointed to fake comments allegedly made by him about Virat Kohli. Also Read: Epstein Files: US Justice department releases 8,000+ new documents following legal pressure His counsel argued that the circulation of such false quotes could harm Gavaskar’s reputation and credibility as a broadcaster and cricket commentator. The suit further flagged the online sale of counterfeit autographed merchandise and photographs, for which people were being charged despite the items having no genuine link to Gavaskar, the report said.

The court instructed that Meta and X users remove the infringing URLs within 72 hours. If they fail to do so, the platform itself must take down the content.

Delhi High Court orders Meta and X to remove fake posts using Sunil Gavaskar’s name

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday rapped the Centre over the massive IndiGo flight disruptions, which saw hundreds of cancellations causing inconvenience to people, and questioned its failure to prevent airlines from increasing their fares to nearly Rs 40,000 after the crisis precipitated. While questioning the unreasonable surge in airfares following the mass cancellation of IndiGo flights, the bench, headed by the Delhi High Court Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya, further asked if any steps have been taken to compensate passengers and to ensure IndiGo employees are behaving responsibly amid the crisis. “Question is why did such a situation precipitate? Who is responsible? It is not a question of an individual, passengers are stranded at airports. Question is loss to the economy,” said Chief Justice Upadhyaya, as quoted by LiveLaw.&nbsp;“If there were a crisis, how could other airlines be permitted to take advantage? How can it go to 35,000 to 39,000? How could other airlines start charging? How can it happen,” asked Justice Tushar Rao Gedela.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/indian-aviation-minister-says-will-fire-indigo-chief-if-needed-can-government-sack-the-ceo-of-private-business-what-the-law-actually-allows-1765350448545">Indian aviation minister says will fire IndiGo chief if needed. Can government sack the CEO of private business? What the law actually allows</a>&nbsp;The sudden rush and demand spike amid the IndiGo chaos led to the doubling and tripling of flight prices, as stranded passengers struggled to book flights of other airlines. Flights to several foreign cities cost less than many busy domestic routes. A one-way ticket fare between Mumbai and Delhi soared to Rs 35,000 in the economy category.&nbsp;When the additional solicitor general (ASG) read out the list of measures taken by the Centre, the HC said, “They are all taken by you once the crisis erupted. The question is not this. Why at all the situation arise? And what have you been doing?”&nbsp;The ASG told the court that the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) had sent a show-cause notice to IndiGo which responded with a ‘profuse apology’. To this, the court said, “We have said we appreciate your efforts. However, what bothers us is how such a situation was allowed to precipitate, leaving lakhs of passengers unattended at the airports.”&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/-airline-has-not-demonstrated-ability-to-operate-dgca-orders-5-cut-in-indigo-flights-1765267204683">‘Airline has not demonstrated ability to operate...’: DGCA orders 5% cut in IndiGo flights</a>&nbsp;The HC agreed to hear a plea on the matter after Supreme Court also acknowledged the gravity of the situation, calling it a “serious matter,” even as it declined an urgent hearing. “It is a serious matter. Lakhs of people are stranded at the airports. We know that the government of India has taken timely action and cognisance of the issue,” CJI Surya Kant had said.&nbsp;The Centre started its crackdown against IndiGo for the chaos at airports, with the DGCA slashing the airline’s winter schedule, reducing the number of flights by 5 per cent. IndiGo operates about 2,200 domestic and international flights daily, which means a reduction of 110 flights daily. The slots freed due to this action would be given to other airlines, the government said.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/aviation-regulator-dgca-issues-show-cause-notice-to-indigo-ceo-over-crisis-1765040272497">‘You failed in your duty’: Aviation regulator DGCA issues show-cause notice to IndiGo CEO over crisis</a>&nbsp;Union Civil Aviation Minister K Ram Mohan Naidu recently told the Parliament that no airline will be permitted to cause hardship to passengers, adding that safety is “non-negotiable”.&nbsp;

The spike in demand led to the doubling and tripling of flight prices, as stranded passengers struggled to book tickets. Flights to several foreign cities cost less than many busy domestic routes. A one-way ticket fare between Mumbai and Delhi soared to Rs 35,000 in the economy category.

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday rapped the Centre over the massive IndiGo flight disruptions, which saw hundreds of cancellations causing inconvenience to people, and questioned its failure to prevent airlines from increasing their fares to nearly Rs 40,000 after the crisis precipitated. While questioning the unreasonable surge in airfares following the mass cancellation of IndiGo flights, the bench, headed by the Delhi High Court Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya, further asked if any steps have been taken to compensate passengers and to ensure IndiGo employees are behaving responsibly amid the crisis. “Question is why did such a situation precipitate? Who is responsible? It is not a question of an individual, passengers are stranded at airports. Question is loss to the economy,” said Chief Justice Upadhyaya, as quoted by LiveLaw. “If there were a crisis, how could other airlines be permitted to take advantage? How can it go to 35,000 to 39,000? How could other airlines start charging? How can it happen,” asked Justice Tushar Rao Gedela. Also Read: Indian aviation minister says will fire IndiGo chief if needed. Can government sack the CEO of private business? What the law actually allows The sudden rush and demand spike amid the IndiGo chaos led to the doubling and tripling of flight prices, as stranded passengers struggled to book flights of other airlines. Flights to several foreign cities cost less than many busy domestic routes. A one-way ticket fare between Mumbai and Delhi soared to Rs 35,000 in the economy category. When the additional solicitor general (ASG) read out the list of measures taken by the Centre, the HC said, “They are all taken by you once the crisis erupted. The question is not this. Why at all the situation arise? And what have you been doing?” The ASG told the court that the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) had sent a show-cause notice to IndiGo which responded with a ‘profuse apology’. To this, the court said, “We have said we appreciate your efforts. However, what bothers us is how such a situation was allowed to precipitate, leaving lakhs of passengers unattended at the airports.” Also Read: ‘Airline has not demonstrated ability to operate...’: DGCA orders 5% cut in IndiGo flights The HC agreed to hear a plea on the matter after Supreme Court also acknowledged the gravity of the situation, calling it a “serious matter,” even as it declined an urgent hearing. “It is a serious matter. Lakhs of people are stranded at the airports. We know that the government of India has taken timely action and cognisance of the issue,” CJI Surya Kant had said. The Centre started its crackdown against IndiGo for the chaos at airports, with the DGCA slashing the airline’s winter schedule, reducing the number of flights by 5 per cent. IndiGo operates about 2,200 domestic and international flights daily, which means a reduction of 110 flights daily. The slots freed due to this action would be given to other airlines, the government said. Also Read: ‘You failed in your duty’: Aviation regulator DGCA issues show-cause notice to IndiGo CEO over crisis Union Civil Aviation Minister K Ram Mohan Naidu recently told the Parliament that no airline will be permitted to cause hardship to passengers, adding that safety is “non-negotiable”.

The spike in demand led to the doubling and tripling of flight prices, as stranded passengers struggled to book tickets. Flights to several foreign cities cost less than many busy domestic routes. A one-way ticket fare between Mumbai and Delhi soared to Rs 35,000 in the economy category.

‘How could other airlines be permitted to take advantage’: Delhi HC pulls up Centre on IndiGo crisis, ‘unreasonable’ fare surge

Paresh Rawal starrer The Taj Story has run into legal trouble days ahead of its theatrical release. A BJP leader from Ayodhya has filed a complaint with the I&amp;B Ministry and the CBFC, seeking a ban on the release of the film. The complainant has claimed that the film is based on a subject of a petition that he filed in the High Court.&nbsp;&nbsp;Rajneesh Singh, a BJP spokesperson from Ayodhya, filed a petition in the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court in May 2022, seeking the opening of 22 locked rooms inside the Taj Mahal, claiming the monument was originally a temple.&nbsp;The petition, in which he sought the formation of a committee involving the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to give clarity on the 17th-century monument, was dismissed by the high court in May 2022.&nbsp;In his complaint to the I&amp; B &nbsp;Ministry and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) on Monday, Singh said, “I filed a PIL for opening the 22 closed rooms in the Taj Mahal. My objective was solely to ensure transparency and verification of historical facts. I have come to know that the movie The Taj Story is based on the subject of my petition.”&nbsp;&nbsp;He also claimed that the film's posters, promotional material, and storyline make references to the judicial subject and the petition in a “misleading” manner without obtaining permission from him.&nbsp;This is a violation of my intellectual and legal rights. The commercial use of a judicial matter is also inappropriate,” Singh said.&nbsp;“The screening of such a film may not only affect the judicial process, but also create unnecessary tension in social and religious sentiments,” he added, demanding an immediate stay on the censor process and public release of The Taj Story.&nbsp;The film's script and storyline should be examined to determine whether it has used the contents of his petition or any other intellectual work without consent, Singh said.&nbsp;The BJP leader also said that until the inquiry is complete, the film's promotion and screening should be prohibited.&nbsp;The Taj Story is an upcoming Hindi courtroom drama written and directed by Tushar Amrish Goel and produced by Suresh Jha. It stars Paresh Rawal, Zakir Hussain, Amruta Khanvilkar, Namit Das and Sneha Wagh in key roles.

Days ahead of the realse of the film The Taj Story, a BJP leader from Ayodhya has filed a PIL against the movie and alleged that it is based on a petition that he had filed few years back. The film stars Paresh Rawal and Zakir Hussain among others. 

Paresh Rawal starrer The Taj Story has run into legal trouble days ahead of its theatrical release. A BJP leader from Ayodhya has filed a complaint with the I&B Ministry and the CBFC, seeking a ban on the release of the film. The complainant has claimed that the film is based on a subject of a petition that he filed in the High Court. Rajneesh Singh, a BJP spokesperson from Ayodhya, filed a petition in the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court in May 2022, seeking the opening of 22 locked rooms inside the Taj Mahal, claiming the monument was originally a temple. The petition, in which he sought the formation of a committee involving the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to give clarity on the 17th-century monument, was dismissed by the high court in May 2022. In his complaint to the I& B Ministry and the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) on Monday, Singh said, “I filed a PIL for opening the 22 closed rooms in the Taj Mahal. My objective was solely to ensure transparency and verification of historical facts. I have come to know that the movie The Taj Story is based on the subject of my petition.” He also claimed that the film's posters, promotional material, and storyline make references to the judicial subject and the petition in a “misleading” manner without obtaining permission from him. This is a violation of my intellectual and legal rights. The commercial use of a judicial matter is also inappropriate,” Singh said. “The screening of such a film may not only affect the judicial process, but also create unnecessary tension in social and religious sentiments,” he added, demanding an immediate stay on the censor process and public release of The Taj Story. The film's script and storyline should be examined to determine whether it has used the contents of his petition or any other intellectual work without consent, Singh said. The BJP leader also said that until the inquiry is complete, the film's promotion and screening should be prohibited. The Taj Story is an upcoming Hindi courtroom drama written and directed by Tushar Amrish Goel and produced by Suresh Jha. It stars Paresh Rawal, Zakir Hussain, Amruta Khanvilkar, Namit Das and Sneha Wagh in key roles.

Days ahead of the realse of the film The Taj Story, a BJP leader from Ayodhya has filed a PIL against the movie and alleged that it is based on a petition that he had filed few years back. The film stars Paresh Rawal and Zakir Hussain among others.&nbsp;

PIL filed in Delhi High Court against the release of Paresh Rawal starrer The Taj Story

Telugu actor Nagarjuna has expressed gratitude to the Delhi High Court for offering protection to his personality rights. Nagarjuna, who previously approached the court against the misuse of his identity on the digital platforms, took to his X handle and wrote, "Grateful to the Hon'ble Delhi High Court for protecting my personality rights in today's digital age." He also mentioned his legal team and added, "The vital legal strategy and arguments were led by Senior Counsel Mr. Vaibhav Gaggar, and Mr. Pravin Anand alongwith Ms. Vaishali, Mr. Somdev, and Mr. Vibhav. Thank you for standing by me."&nbsp;Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/hollywood/keanu-reeves-s-girlfriend-alexandra-grant-reacts-to-reports-around-couple-s-secret-wedding-1758862023348">Did Keanu Reeves and Alexandra Grant secretly tie the knot?</a> On Thursday, the Delhi High Court was set to pass orders on whether to grant ad-interim relief to Nagarjuna. The plea came up before Justice Tejas Karia. The petition flagged three categories of violations: pornographic content falsely attributed to him, unauthorised merchandising, and AI-generated material misusing his likeness. Counsel pointed to YouTube shorts and paid promotional videos that use hashtags linked to Nagarjuna and warned that such content could further be used to train artificial intelligence models.

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Grateful to the Hon’ble Delhi High Court for protecting my personality rights in today’s digital age. The vital legal strategy and arguments were led by Senior Counsel Mr. Vaibhav Gaggar, and Mr. Pravin Anand alongwith Ms. Vaishali, Mr. Somdev, and Mr. Vibhav. Thank you for…&mdash; Nagarjuna Akkineni (@iamnagarjuna) <a href="https://twitter.com/iamnagarjuna/status/1971184307239842273?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 25, 2025</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

The Court observed that once material is uploaded on the internet, generative AI models can pick it up regardless of its authenticity. While noting that specific URLs, 14 identified so far, can be directed to be taken down, Justice Karia also remarked on the broader question of how long such injunctions can reasonably continue, given the enduring fame of public figures. Appearing for the actor, Advocate Pravin Anand submitted that Nagarjuna, with 95 films to his credit and two national awards, enjoys a formidable reputation in the Telugu film industry.&nbsp;Also read:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/entertainment/pawan-kalyan-s-og-police-stop-fan-gathering-organised-without-permission-fir-filed-1758860192249">Pawan Kalyan's OG: Police STOP fan gathering organised without permission</a> Widely referred to as a "celluloid scientist" for his versatility, he is also celebrated for his role in Shiva, which Anand said changed the course of Indian cinema. The actor's large online presence, over six million followers on X and more than eight million on Facebook, was also highlighted. In line with its efforts to protect celebrity rights in the online space, the Delhi High Court restrained various websites and platforms from violating the publicity and personality rights of Bollywood actors Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, Abhishek Bachchan and Karan Johar. It prohibited the respondents from misusing their names, images, voices, acronyms, likenesses, or any attributes uniquely identifiable with them.

Counsel pointed to YouTube shorts and paid promotional videos that use hashtags linked to Nagarjuna and warned that such content could further be used to train artificial intelligence models.

Telugu actor Nagarjuna has expressed gratitude to the Delhi High Court for offering protection to his personality rights. Nagarjuna, who previously approached the court against the misuse of his identity on the digital platforms, took to his X handle and wrote, "Grateful to the Hon'ble Delhi High Court for protecting my personality rights in today's digital age." He also mentioned his legal team and added, "The vital legal strategy and arguments were led by Senior Counsel Mr. Vaibhav Gaggar, and Mr. Pravin Anand alongwith Ms. Vaishali, Mr. Somdev, and Mr. Vibhav. Thank you for standing by me." Also read: Did Keanu Reeves and Alexandra Grant secretly tie the knot? On Thursday, the Delhi High Court was set to pass orders on whether to grant ad-interim relief to Nagarjuna. The plea came up before Justice Tejas Karia. The petition flagged three categories of violations: pornographic content falsely attributed to him, unauthorised merchandising, and AI-generated material misusing his likeness. Counsel pointed to YouTube shorts and paid promotional videos that use hashtags linked to Nagarjuna and warned that such content could further be used to train artificial intelligence models.

Counsel pointed to YouTube shorts and paid promotional videos that use hashtags linked to Nagarjuna and warned that such content could further be used to train artificial intelligence models.

Delhi High Court protects Nagarjuna personality rights, actor expresses gratitude

In a shocking incident, a first-year engineering student allegedly ended his life by committing suicide in his hostel, the Telangana police said on Monday (September 22). According to reports, senior students forced him to ragging, and also asked him to drink alcohol and taking him to a bar, where they told him to pay the bill of nearly ₹10,000. When the seniors pressured him to pay the full bill, the student ended his life by hanging himself. As per officials, the student died by hanging himself. Prior to that, he also recorded a video of himself claiming that his seniors were harassing him and asking for money.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/kashmir-s-horticulture-agriculture-tourism-and-handicraft-industries-welcome-the-reduction-in-gst-1758532225997">Kashmir's horticulture, agriculture, tourism, and handicraft industries welcome the reduction in GST</a>&nbsp;One of the police official said, “We have registered a case and are investigating into the matter. More details will be provided later.” Meanwhile, the family of the deceased staged a protest in front of Medipally police station demanding justice. They also demanded punishment for those responsible for his death.&nbsp;On September 11, the Delhi High Court expressed deep concern over the increasing number of student suicides in higher educational institutions, stressing the urgent need for a strong and effective anti-ragging system. This statement came as the court dismissed two petitions filed by the Aman Satya Kachroo Trust, which had contested the University Grants Commission's (UGC) decision to assign the contract for the National Ragging Prevention Programme to the Centre for Youth (C4Y) Society. The Bench, led by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal, highlighted the disturbing rise in student suicides and called for swift action to address the issue. The judges emphasised that the establishment of a functional and responsive anti-ragging helpline is crucial and cannot be delayed, warning that further inaction could result in more tragic losses of young lives.

Telangana: First-year engineering student dies by suicide, alleged harassment by seniors; police register case

In a shocking incident, a first-year engineering student allegedly ended his life by committing suicide in his hostel, the Telangana police said on Monday (September 22). According to reports, senior students forced him to ragging, and also asked him to drink alcohol and taking him to a bar, where they told him to pay the bill of nearly ₹10,000. When the seniors pressured him to pay the full bill, the student ended his life by hanging himself. As per officials, the student died by hanging himself. Prior to that, he also recorded a video of himself claiming that his seniors were harassing him and asking for money. Also Read: Kashmir's horticulture, agriculture, tourism, and handicraft industries welcome the reduction in GST One of the police official said, “We have registered a case and are investigating into the matter. More details will be provided later.” Meanwhile, the family of the deceased staged a protest in front of Medipally police station demanding justice. They also demanded punishment for those responsible for his death. On September 11, the Delhi High Court expressed deep concern over the increasing number of student suicides in higher educational institutions, stressing the urgent need for a strong and effective anti-ragging system. This statement came as the court dismissed two petitions filed by the Aman Satya Kachroo Trust, which had contested the University Grants Commission's (UGC) decision to assign the contract for the National Ragging Prevention Programme to the Centre for Youth (C4Y) Society. The Bench, led by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Anish Dayal, highlighted the disturbing rise in student suicides and called for swift action to address the issue. The judges emphasised that the establishment of a functional and responsive anti-ragging helpline is crucial and cannot be delayed, warning that further inaction could result in more tragic losses of young lives.

A first-year engineering student allegedly took his own life in Telangana after enduring ragging by seniors, who forced him to drink alcohol and pay a hefty bill

Telangana: First-year engineering student dies by suicide, alleging harassment by seniors; police register case

Bollywood actors and public figures from Aishwarya Rai to Ratan Tata, famous personalities have seek help from Delhi High Court for the rights of their images, voice and name.


Bollywood actors and public figures from Aishwarya Rai to Ratan Tata, famous personalities, have sought help from the Delhi High Court for the rights of their images, voice and name. &nbsp;

From Aishwarya Rai to Ratan Tata: Celebrities who moved Delhi High Court for personality rights

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (September 3) questioned why Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra and Supreme Court lawyer Jai Anant Dehadrai could not simply resolve their dispute over the custody of a pet dog without dragging it further into litigation. “Why don’t you both sit down and sort this out? What exactly is she asking for in this suit?” Justice Sachin Datta Jain asked, while hearing Moitra’s plea for joint custody of Henry, a Rottweiler.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/imd-issues-red-alert-as-heavy-rain-return-to-delhi-ncr-parts-of-region-flooded-yamuna-over-danger-mark-1756899074617">IMD issues 'Red Alert' as heavy rain return to Delhi-NCR; parts of region flooded, Yamuna breaches 207m</a>&nbsp;The quarrel over the dog has been ongoing since 2023, with both sides claiming ownership. Moitra insists Henry belongs to her, while Dehadrai argues that he has cared for the dog since it was just 40 days old, making him the rightful guardian. Dehadrai is also contesting a trial court order that prevents either party from discussing the case publicly. His counsel, advocate Sanjay Ghose, argued that the order infringes on his client’s right to free expression. Ghose pointed out that even a social media post that did not name the case was treated as a violation of the court’s directive. “Is an MP entitled to a higher privilege than any other litigant?” he asked.&nbsp;Also Read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/monsoon-chaos-in-j-k-highways-shut-schools-closed-people-evacuated-from-low-lying-areas-1756897328493">Monsoon chaos in J&amp;K: Highways shut, schools closed; people evacuated from low-lying areas</a>&nbsp;The court has now sought a reply from Moitra and adjourned the matter until December. The dispute over Henry has not unfolded in isolation—it has been intertwined with a far more politically charged controversy. A complaint by Dehadrai in 2023 set in motion an inquiry by the Lok Sabha Ethics Committee, which eventually recommended Moitra’s expulsion over allegations that she accepted favors from businessman Darshan Hiranandani to target the Adani Group and Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Parliament. BJP MP Nishikant Dubey had forwarded Dehadrai’s complaint to the Speaker.&nbsp;Moitra, who has denied any wrongdoing, described the proceedings as a “fixed match” conducted by a “kangaroo court.” Meanwhile, the personal feud has spilled over into multiple police complaints, including allegations of trespass and intimidation by both sides. For now, the question of who gets Henry remains unresolved—leaving the Rottweiler at the center of both a bitter breakup and a high-profile political storm.

Dogfight in court: Delhi HC urges Mahua Moitra, ex-partner to settle custody row over pet rottweiler

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday (September 3) questioned why Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra and Supreme Court lawyer Jai Anant Dehadrai could not simply resolve their dispute over the custody of a pet dog without dragging it further into litigation. “Why don’t you both sit down and sort this out? What exactly is she asking for in this suit?” Justice Sachin Datta Jain asked, while hearing Moitra’s plea for joint custody of Henry, a Rottweiler. Also Read: IMD issues 'Red Alert' as heavy rain return to Delhi-NCR; parts of region flooded, Yamuna breaches 207m The quarrel over the dog has been ongoing since 2023, with both sides claiming ownership. Moitra insists Henry belongs to her, while Dehadrai argues that he has cared for the dog since it was just 40 days old, making him the rightful guardian. Dehadrai is also contesting a trial court order that prevents either party from discussing the case publicly. His counsel, advocate Sanjay Ghose, argued that the order infringes on his client’s right to free expression. Ghose pointed out that even a social media post that did not name the case was treated as a violation of the court’s directive. “Is an MP entitled to a higher privilege than any other litigant?” he asked. Also Read: Monsoon chaos in J&K: Highways shut, schools closed; people evacuated from low-lying areas The court has now sought a reply from Moitra and adjourned the matter until December. The dispute over Henry has not unfolded in isolation—it has been intertwined with a far more politically charged controversy. A complaint by Dehadrai in 2023 set in motion an inquiry by the Lok Sabha Ethics Committee, which eventually recommended Moitra’s expulsion over allegations that she accepted favors from businessman Darshan Hiranandani to target the Adani Group and Prime Minister Narendra Modi in Parliament. BJP MP Nishikant Dubey had forwarded Dehadrai’s complaint to the Speaker. Moitra, who has denied any wrongdoing, described the proceedings as a “fixed match” conducted by a “kangaroo court.” Meanwhile, the personal feud has spilled over into multiple police complaints, including allegations of trespass and intimidation by both sides. For now, the question of who gets Henry remains unresolved—leaving the Rottweiler at the center of both a bitter breakup and a high-profile political storm.

Delhi HC has urged Mahua Moitra, Jai Anant Dehadrai to resolve pet dog Henry’s custody dispute. The fight over the custody of dog has been going since 2023

Justice Yashwant Varma has been transferred from the Delhi High Court to the Allahabad High Court following allegations of cash being found at his residence. The Supreme Court, which recommended the transfer, clarified that it is not connected to the ongoing investigation into the cash recovery.

Justice Yashwant Varma transferred to Allahabad High Court amid cash recovery row

The Union government on Friday approved the transfer of Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma to his parent Allahabad High Court in the cash haul case. The government notified the repatriation, acting on the March 24 recommendation of the Supreme Court Collegium. Justice Varma has been directed to assume his position, but the Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court has been asked not to assign any judicial work to him for the time being as a judge there. After the government&rsquo;s notification, Chief Justice of India Sanjeev Khanna issued a mandate for the Allahabad high court chief justice not to assign any judicial work to Justice Varma, pending the inquiry. Additionally, the Centre also approved the repatriation of another Delhi High Court judge, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, to the Allahabad High Court. The repatriation recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium had also been pending.
Also Read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/why-are-muslims-in-india-wearing-black-armbands-during-alvida-namaz-8900835">Why are Muslims in India wearing black armbands during Alvida namaz?</a>
In November 2024, the Supreme Court Collegium, led by CJI Sanjeev Khanna and also comprising Justices BR Gavai and Suryakant, had recommended Justice Singh&rsquo;s repatriation to his parent court.
Both, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh and Justice Yashwant Sharma had been transferred to the Delhi High Court in October 2021.
The Collegium had recommended Justice Varma&rsquo;s repatriation to the Allahabad High Court after the recovery of a cash pile from his residential premises during a fire incident on March 14. Following the incident, the Delhi High Court registry had also withdrawn all judicial work assigned to Justice Varma. The CJI has already constituted a three-member panel to conduct a detailed probe into the cash pile recovery that sent shockwaves in legal circles. The probe is expected to assess the allegations and determine whether Justice Varma&rsquo;s continuation as a judge is tenable.
Also Read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/yeshu-yeshu-pastor-found-guilty-in-2018-sexual-harassment-case-by-punjab-court-8900478" target="_blank" rel="noopener">&lsquo;Yeshu Yeshu pastor&rsquo; found guilty in 2018 sexual harassment case by Punjab court</a>
Justice Varma has dismissed the charges and claims that he is being defamed in the press.
However, the decision of his transfer by the Supreme Court Collegium was met with protests by the Allahabad Bar Association, which started an indefinite strike saying it would not tolerate judges facing corruption charges and urged the CJI to withdraw Justice Varma&rsquo;s transfer recommendation. The Allahabad Bar Association is demanding his impeachment instead.
Justice Varma landed in a controversy after firefighters responding to a fire at his Tughlak Road residence on March 14 found stacks of cash, some of which were allegedly charred. The incident led to widespread consternation and calls for a thorough investigation into the matter.
Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/mamata-banerjee-heckled-during-oxford-university-speech-questioned-on-rg-rape-murder-case-8899764" rel="dofollow noopener" target="_blank">Mamata Banerjee heckled during Oxford University speech, questioned on RG rape-murder case</a>

India News: The Collegium had recommended Justice Varma’s repatriation to the Allahabad High Court after the recovery of a cash pile from his residential premises during a fire incident on March 14.

The Union government on Friday approved the transfer of Delhi High Court judge Justice Yashwant Varma to his parent Allahabad High Court in the cash haul case. The government notified the repatriation, acting on the March 24 recommendation of the Supreme Court Collegium. Justice Varma has been directed to assume his position, but the Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court has been asked not to assign any judicial work to him for the time being as a judge there. After the government’s notification, Chief Justice of India Sanjeev Khanna issued a mandate for the Allahabad high court chief justice not to assign any judicial work to Justice Varma, pending the inquiry. Additionally, the Centre also approved the repatriation of another Delhi High Court judge, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh, to the Allahabad High Court. The repatriation recommended by the Supreme Court Collegium had also been pending. Also Read | Why are Muslims in India wearing black armbands during Alvida namaz? In November 2024, the Supreme Court Collegium, led by CJI Sanjeev Khanna and also comprising Justices BR Gavai and Suryakant, had recommended Justice Singh’s repatriation to his parent court. Both, Justice Chandra Dhari Singh and Justice Yashwant Sharma had been transferred to the Delhi High Court in October 2021. The Collegium had recommended Justice Varma’s repatriation to the Allahabad High Court after the recovery of a cash pile from his residential premises during a fire incident on March 14. Following the incident, the Delhi High Court registry had also withdrawn all judicial work assigned to Justice Varma. The CJI has already constituted a three-member panel to conduct a detailed probe into the cash pile recovery that sent shockwaves in legal circles. The probe is expected to assess the allegations and determine whether Justice Varma’s continuation as a judge is tenable. Also Read | ‘Yeshu Yeshu pastor’ found guilty in 2018 sexual harassment case by Punjab court Justice Varma has dismissed the charges and claims that he is being defamed in the press. However, the decision of his transfer by the Supreme Court Collegium was met with protests by the Allahabad Bar Association, which started an indefinite strike saying it would not tolerate judges facing corruption charges and urged the CJI to withdraw Justice Varma’s transfer recommendation. The Allahabad Bar Association is demanding his impeachment instead. Justice Varma landed in a controversy after firefighters responding to a fire at his Tughlak Road residence on March 14 found stacks of cash, some of which were allegedly charred. The incident led to widespread consternation and calls for a thorough investigation into the matter. Also read | Mamata Banerjee heckled during Oxford University speech, questioned on RG rape-murder case

Union govt clears Justice Varma’s transfer, HC told not to assign him judicial work

A Delhi Fire Services report, filed on Friday (March 21), states that its personnel conducted the firefighting operation at the official residence of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/why-sell-excess-tickets-delhi-high-court-questions-authorities-over-stampede-8737771">Delhi High Court</a> Justice Yashwant Varma on Tughlak Road promptly on Friday, March 14. The report mentions that it was a small fire in the store of the residence in which stationery and domestic articles were present, and there was no casualty.
The fire service control room received a call about a blaze at Justice Varma&rsquo;s residence in Lutyens Delhi at 11:35 pm on 14 March. Two fire tenders were dispatched immediately and reached the location by 11:43 pm.
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/who-is-justice-yashwant-varma-delhi-high-court-judge-transferred-after-firefighters-find-cash-stash-in-fire-hit-home-8876788">&lsquo;Rumours being spread&rsquo;: Indian SC says Justice Yashwant Varma&rsquo;s transfer &lsquo;independent&rsquo; of inquiry against him</a>
The fire broke out in a storeroom containing stationery and household items. The flames were brought under control within 15 minutes, and no injuries were reported.
&ldquo;Soon after dousing the flames, we informed police about the fire incident. Thereafter, a team of fire department personnel left the spot,&rdquo; a DFS official said.
Earlier reports had claimed that a cash pile was found from the residence.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court Collegium, headed by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, has ordered an initial inquiry into the incident. Justice Varma's transfer to the Allahabad High Court has also been&nbsp;confirmed, following reports of a cash stash being allegedly found at his residence.
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/massive-cash-pile-found-in-delhi-hc-judges-house-after-fire-breaks-out-justice-yashwant-varma-transferred-8875370">Massive cash pile found in Delhi HC judge's house after fire breaks out, Justice Yashwant Varma transferred</a>
However, the Supreme Court has clarified that Justice Varma&rsquo;s transfer is unrelated to the internal inquiry process.
In a statement quoted by ANI, the top court said, &ldquo;There is misinformation and rumours being spread with regard to the incident at the residence of Mr. Justice Yashwant Varma...The proposal for transfer of Mr. Justice Yashwant Varma, who is the second senior most Judge in the Delhi High Court and a member of the Collegium, to his parent High Court, i.e., the&nbsp;High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, where he will be ninth in seniority, is independent and separate from the in-house enquiry procedure.&rdquo;
Also read: <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-president-donald-trump-calls-for-impeachment-of-james-boasberg-lunatic-judge-who-halted-deportations-8866485">&lsquo;Not an appropriate response&rsquo;: US Chief Justice rebukes Trump&rsquo;s call to impeach &lsquo;lunatic&rsquo; judge James Boasberg</a>
(With inputs from agencies)

India news: “Soon after dousing the flames, we informed police about the fire incident. Thereafter, a team of fire department personnel left the spot,” the fire report filed by the Divisional Officer of Delhi Fire Service says.

A Delhi Fire Services report, filed on Friday (March 21), states that its personnel conducted the firefighting operation at the official residence of Delhi High Court Justice Yashwant Varma on Tughlak Road promptly on Friday, March 14. The report mentions that it was a small fire in the store of the residence in which stationery and domestic articles were present, and there was no casualty. The fire service control room received a call about a blaze at Justice Varma’s residence in Lutyens Delhi at 11:35 pm on 14 March. Two fire tenders were dispatched immediately and reached the location by 11:43 pm. Also read: ‘Rumours being spread’: Indian SC says Justice Yashwant Varma’s transfer ‘independent’ of inquiry against him The fire broke out in a storeroom containing stationery and household items. The flames were brought under control within 15 minutes, and no injuries were reported. “Soon after dousing the flames, we informed police about the fire incident. Thereafter, a team of fire department personnel left the spot,” a DFS official said. Earlier reports had claimed that a cash pile was found from the residence. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court Collegium, headed by Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, has ordered an initial inquiry into the incident. Justice Varma's transfer to the Allahabad High Court has also been confirmed, following reports of a cash stash being allegedly found at his residence. Also read: Massive cash pile found in Delhi HC judge's house after fire breaks out, Justice Yashwant Varma transferred However, the Supreme Court has clarified that Justice Varma’s transfer is unrelated to the internal inquiry process. In a statement quoted by ANI, the top court said, “There is misinformation and rumours being spread with regard to the incident at the residence of Mr. Justice Yashwant Varma...The proposal for transfer of Mr. Justice Yashwant Varma, who is the second senior most Judge in the Delhi High Court and a member of the Collegium, to his parent High Court, i.e., the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, where he will be ninth in seniority, is independent and separate from the in-house enquiry procedure.” Also read: ‘Not an appropriate response’: US Chief Justice rebukes Trump’s call to impeach ‘lunatic’ judge James Boasberg (With inputs from agencies)

Fire at Justice Yashwant Varma’s home: Here's what the Delhi Fire Service report says

delhi-high-court

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

delhi high-court

Delhi riots case: HC rejects bail pleas of Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam

Muslim marriage cannot shield sex with minor wife under POCSO: Delhi HC

UK in touch with family after Delhi court grants bail to Jagtar Singh Johal

Delhi building collapse: HC orders MCD to launch high-level probe into incident

Delhi High Court receives bomb threat via email

Delhi HC to hear plea challenging internet suspension near Jantar Mantar

'Some isolated incident...?' Delhi HC's response on Jantar Mantar protest plea

Sonam Wangchuk hospitalised on 21st day of hunger strike | refuses IV fluids despite critical health

Sonam Wangchuk hospitalised on 21st day of hunger strike | refuses IV fluids despite critical health

Meta, Google tell Delhi High Court they can't proactively act as 'super censor'

Cricketer Abhishek Sharma seeks Delhi HC protection for personality rights

Vinesh Phogat set for Asian Games trials after SC upholds Delhi HC order

‘$314M tax hit, Delhi ban’: HC rejects Absolut Vodka maker’s plea for licence

Cockroach Janta Party's X account to stay blocked: Delhi HC declines to order immediate restoration

Delhi High Court clears wrestler Vinesh Phogat for Asian Games selection trials

Porn clip plays three times during virtual hearing in Delhi High Court

LPG crisis hits Delhi High Court: Lawyers' Canteen stops serving hot meals

No suspension of sentence for Kuldeep Sengar in custodial killing case: Delhi HC

Delhi HC issues notice over data privacy violations by digital lending apps

Unnao rape case: CBI challenges Delhi HC's bail order for convict Kuldeep Sengar

Delhi HC questions govt over 18% GST on air purifiers amid pollution crisis

Delhi HC orders Meta and X to remove fake posts using Sunil Gavaskar’s name

Delhi High Court pulls up Centre on IndiGo crisis, ‘unreasonable’ fare surge

PIL filed in Delhi HC against the release of Paresh Rawal starrer The Taj Story

Delhi High Court protects Nagarjuna personality rights, expresses gratitude

Engineering student dies by suicide, alleging harassment by seniors; case filed