DUSU

A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad granted time to the petitioner to file certain documents. Accordingly, the court listed the matter to be next heard on August 7.

The PIL states: "That the Petitioner came across news items in electronic and print media where news related to waiving of loan to the tune of Rs 11 lakh crore had been broadcasted on NDTV in the year 2021. "Similarly, News24 channel had published more than two years ago that loans of 50 loan defaulters have been waived off and that loan amount was to the tune of Rs 68,000 crore which included the name of Mehul Choksi."

On March 22, the court had reserved its order on Jain and his two aides' bail pleas in the matter. Jain has been in custody since May 30 last year and his co-accused are Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain. Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma had heard arguments by the accused's counsel and Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju representing.

The case involves mishandling of the Chief Minister's Distress Relief Fund (CMDRF). It's been a year since this case has been waiting for the verdict and it was only after the petitioner approached the Kerala High Court last week seeking its intervention that things have now speeded up. The High Court asked the petitioner to approach the Lokayukta with his petition and it was after this ruling came, that the Lokayukta decided to take up the case on Friday.

Jain has been in custody since May 30 last year and his co-accused are Vaibhav Jain and Ankush Jain. Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma heard arguments by accused's counsel, Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju representing the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

Upadhyay had moved the plea on Wednesday. A division bench headed by Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma said that voting is a choice and judges are not lawmakers who can pass such directions. The bench, also comprising Justice Subramonium Prasad, said that it cannot force a person in Chennai to come back to his home town in Srinagar and vote there.

Umrao moved the High Court on Monday seeking transit pre-arrest bail after the TN Police lodged an FIR against him for allegedly disseminating false information claiming attacks on migrant workers from Bihar in the southern state. TN's Thoothukudi Central Police Station registered the FIR against Umrao under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) such as provocation with intent to cause riot, provoking breach of peace and statement leading to public mischief, promoting enmity and hatred.

The court said that no purpose will be served by conducting fresh elections on February 27. Justice Gaurang Kanth said that prima facie, the notice is in violation of Regulation 51 of the New Delhi Municipal Council (Procedure and Conduct of Business) Regulations, 1997, as the returning officer or Mayor is conducting re-elections without declaring the results of the elections conducted on February 24.

A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad was hearing a plea filed in a form of Public Interest Litigation (PIL) seeking a direction to the city government to appoint a Lokayukta as promised by the party in its election manifesto of 2020. division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad.

A single-judge bench of Justice Sudhir Kumar Jain, however, granted him liberty to submit a representation to the Delhi Police. Representing Khan, Advocate M Sufian Siddiqui contended that at the time of opening a history sheet, the police officer, according to the law, should have stated the reason, but in Khan's case, the rules were not followed and he was listed as bad character.