The judge's rebuke of a female advocate & comments calling an area in Bangalore 'Pakistan' have gone viral on social media. The Supreme Court has taken suo motu cognisance of the matter.
Some of his judgments include using the tying of a rakhi as bail condition for a man accused of outraging woman's modesty & directing an 'abusive' man to live with his wife, among others.
Rohit Arya is also known for giving bail to a man accused of outraging the modesty of a woman on the condition that he tie a rakhi and promise to protect her.
In his letter to the Delhi Police, Justice Gaurang Kanth said he lost his pet dog due to security personnel’s failure in locking the door of his residence.
In ‘Syed Mahmood: Colonial India’s Dissenting Judge’, Mohammad Nasir and Samreen Ahmed chronicle how India’s first Muslim judge left an Eastern mark on the Western world.
Srinagar Principal Sessions Judge Abdul Rashid Malik alleged that the secretary to J&K High Court judge had conveyed directions to make sure that no bail was granted in a case.
Former civil judge Anil Gaur claims he’s a victim of collusion between a lawyer and the SC judge, who was administrative judge in Panchkula in 2007, when he was dismissed.
While the commission didn’t mention provisions under which IndiGo's market domination would be examined, Competition Act 2002 prohibits abuse of dominant position by any enterprise.
It is argued that India-Israel ties are moving from buyer–seller dynamic to one focused on joint development & manufacturing partnership, a shift 'more durable' than traditional arms sales.
Don’t blame misfortune. This is colossal incompetence and insensitivity. So bad, heads would have rolled even in the old PSU-era Indian Airlines and Air India.
One can understand the anger over the misogynistic remarks directed at the lady advocate. But why take umbrage over the “Mysuru Road auto” remark? He just stated the obvious truth.
The situation is the same across all Muslim dominated localities in India. Why should the truth be accused of falling foul of the Indian Constitution. If the Constitution falls foul w.r.t to the truth, then the Constitution is at fault. Not the truth.
If anyone beeds proof of what the judge said, I request them to visit the area in question and spend an hour there. They can see and hear things for thenselves.
One can understand the anger over the misogynistic remarks directed at the lady advocate. But why take umbrage over the “Mysuru Road auto” remark? He just stated the obvious truth.
The situation is the same across all Muslim dominated localities in India. Why should the truth be accused of falling foul of the Indian Constitution. If the Constitution falls foul w.r.t to the truth, then the Constitution is at fault. Not the truth.
If anyone beeds proof of what the judge said, I request them to visit the area in question and spend an hour there. They can see and hear things for thenselves.