Case was referred to 7-judge bench by a 5-judge SC bench in 2020, which expressed doubts about correctness of a 2005 ruling that held SCs were 'homogenous' group & couldn't be sub-classified.
Case pertains to video by YouTuber Dhruv Rathee in 2018, which was retweeted by Delhi CM. Delhi HC observed that anyone who reposts defamatory content can be held liable for defamation.
SC was hearing plea of AAP councillor who challenged BJP win in Chandigarh mayoral polls following presiding officer's decision to scrap votes of 8 AAP, Congress councillors.
Delhi HC bench was hearing the wife’s appeal against divorce granted by family court in 2019 on basis of alleged mental cruelty towards husband, including taunts & abuse of their child.
He further said that having access to live proceedings in courts leads to a better understanding of law and justice for the common man and that strengthens the system itself.
In latest report submitted to law ministry, Commission says 'right to reputation needs to be protected as it’s a facet of right to life and personal liberty guaranteed under Article 21'.
SC, which is hearing an appeal to a 2006 HC ruling, will revisit its 1967 decision in which it held Aligarh Muslim University's not a minority institution. A roundup of arguments so far.
Comedian Kunal Kamra, Editors Guild of India & others challenged 2023 amendment allowing Centre to set up fact-check unit to identify false online content 'related to business of govt'.
The trouble for the Democrats is that their choices are bad. Even Biden’s Vice President, Kamala Harris, admitted that he had a slow start. The calls for him to step aside will only grow.
Navy team has already visited Ambala air station where IAF has kept one squadron of Rafales to understand commonalities of maintenance that can be pursued.
Changed reality for Modi govt in its 3rd innings is by no means rise of a new phenomenon. It's a return to old normal where even majorities had to routinely wrestle with storied million mutinies.
Did the Delhi court know that no proofs in the Delhi Liquor alleged scam are provided by ED and CBI yet. But still money laundering cases were filed against the AAP leaders and they are held in custody. Did the judge consider that?
Did the Delhi court know that no proofs in the Delhi Liquor alleged scam are provided by ED and CBI yet. But still money laundering cases were filed against the AAP leaders and they are held in custody. Did the judge consider that?