by admin | Apr 13, 2025 | courts, government, indian national news, politics, politics and law
New Delhi [India], March 28 (ANI): The Delhi High Court on Friday granted relief to Baramulla MP
Engineer Rashid
By cutting down the amount to 50 percent of what was initially requested.
Tihar
Prison officials for his journey to
Parliament
in order to join the current session.
He received approval to join the event.
Parliament
session in custody.
He mentioned that
Tihar
The jail administration is imposing charges of Rs 1.45 lakh for a single day’s travel expenses. Permission was granted on March 25.
A division bench of Justices Chandra Dhari Singh and Anup Jairam Bhambhani reduced the amount and asked
Engineer Rashid
To deposit the half sum of Rs 8.74 lakh within three days so he can make his trip possible.
Parliament
for session in custody.
The Supreme Court has scheduled the application for an additional hearing on May 19.
MP Abdul Rashid Sheikh aka
Engineer Rashid
had moved to Delhi High Court for modification of order granting him permission to attend
Parliament
He was in custody during his session and wanted to waive the requirement for covering travel costs.
Tihar
Jail to
Parliament
and back to Jail.
It was suggested that the fees currently requested by the jail authorities are unreasonably high, and the applicant lacks the financial means to cover these costs.
Abdul Rashid Sheikh submitted an application via attorney Vikhyat Oberoi, requesting that the High Court modify its Final Order from March 25, 2025, and waive or remove certain conditions.
It has been suggested that following the upload of the order on March 26, 2025, during the afternoon, the counsel for
Engineer Rashid
Received an email from the worried jail officials on March 26, 2025, at 8:21 PM, stating that the appellant needs to pay around INR 1,45,736 per day for travel and associated expenses, amounting to a total of INR 8,74,416 for six days.
It is further contended that the applicant is in judicial custody and cannot manage to secure such a significant sum.
It is additionally contended that even during previous instances where the applicant was permitted to swear an oath,
Parliament
Regarding the order from July 2, 2024; and also when permission was granted for the applicant to attend
Parliament
In accordance with the ruling dated February 10, 2025, from an earlier hearing, he was not obligated to cover the expenses related to his travel or any associated arrangements.
The plea indicates that in previous cases, the responsibility for covering costs associated with travel and other arrangements was not placed upon the applicant.
Moreover, in this particular instance, the issue of cost has also not been brought up by either the prison authorities or the prosecution team, it noted.
It is posited that the applicant has been detained since August 9, 2019, and lacks the resources to pay such substantial and unreasonable sums.
It is further claimed that the applicant’s family has, despite significant challenges, gathered funds via crowdfunding and covered their expenses for one day, specifically March 27, 2025.
On Tuesday, the Delhi High Court permitted the Baramulla Member of Parliament to participate in the session from March 26 to April 4, 2024.
He will be transferred into custody.
Tihar
Jail to
Parliament
A house on each of these dates
Lok Sabha
is underway from March 26, 2025 to April 04, 2025, within the specified times.
Lok Sabha
“will remain in session on those specific days. Afterward, he will be returned to the prison,” stated the High Court.
The High Court stated that the appellant must cover the costs associated with the aforementioned travel and additional arrangements.
Engineer Rashid
had submitted a request to be allowed to participate in the event
Parliament
His previous plea was rejected by the trial court on March 10.
Nevertheless, he was permitted to join for the initial session lasting two days in February. (ANI)
Provided by Syndigate Media Inc. (
Syndigate.info
).
by admin | Apr 1, 2025 | controversies, courts, news, politics, politics and law
New Delhi [India], April 1 (ANI): The
Supreme Court
On Tuesday mentioned that they will review the submission of
YouTuber
and Podcaster
Ranveer Allahabadia
to return his passport for international travel following the inquiry into the matter related to the contentious comments he and others made during an episode
India’s Got Latent
is completed.
The Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who represents the Maharashtra government, informed the Supreme Court that the investigation in the case would be concluded within two weeks.
The bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and NK Singh further prolonged the temporary order shielding the podcast host from potential arrest.
FIR
are registered against him in
Guwahati
, Mumbai and Jaipur.
The petitioner has pledged that his program, which has been approved, will uphold propriety standards and avoid discussing matters currently under judicial consideration across various platforms. In response to inquiries, the Solicitor General stated that investigations in the pending case continue.
FIR
It is expected to be finished within the next fourteen days.
“As the petitioner could potentially be needed to participate in the current investigation, his request for the return of his passport and permission to travel overseas will be reviewed once the investigation has concluded,” the document read.
The supreme court was considering his appeal requesting the consolidation of
FIR
are registered against him nationwide due to contentious comments made by him and other participants during an incident.
India’s Got Latent
.
Previously, the highest court allowed Allahabadia to restart his podcast ‘The Ranveer Show,’ with the condition that he uphold standards of propriety and ethics.
This enabled Allahabadia to continue the program after considering that the employment of approximately 280 staff members relies on broadcasting his show.
Prior to that, the bench had ordered Allahabadia and his associates to stay away from show business for a certain period.
The top court had come down heavily on Allahabadia for his inappropriate comments during his guest appearance on the show, and described it as “dirty and perverted.”
The supreme court had likewise instructed that no additional action should be taken.
FIR
will be recorded against him based on the episode broadcasted on the program. Additionally, they have requested him to submit his passport to the police and he is prohibited from leaving the country without obtaining approval from the court.
The organization additionally queried whether the Centre desired to intervene concerning explicit material on platforms like YouTube and various social media outlets, and requested support from both the Attorney General and Solicitor General pertaining to this issue.
On February 11, Assam’s Chief Minister, Himanta Biswa Sarma, stated the following:
Guwahati
Police has registered an
FIR
against
YouTuber
and social media personalities like Allahabadia, Samay Raina, Ashish Chanchlani, Jaspreet Singh, Apoorva Makhija, among others, for advocating inappropriate content and participating in sexually graphic and crude conversations.
India’s Got Latent
.
FIR
Several cases have been filed against them in Mumbai and
Guwahati
. (ANI)
Provided by Syndigate Media Inc. (
Syndigate.info
).
by admin | Mar 31, 2025 | courts, news, politics, politics and government, politics and law
Billionaire Elon Musk distributed $1 million (£770,000) checks to voters in Wisconsin following the state Supreme Court’s decision not to interfere.
Earlier this week, Musk announced the prize prior to Wisconsin’s closely contested Supreme Court election scheduled for Tuesday.
Josh Kaul, Wisconsin’s Attorney General from the Democratic party, filed a lawsuit aimed at halting the giveaway, contending that Musk was breaching a state statute prohibiting presents offered in exchange for votes.
The competition, which might shift the control of the state’s highest court to the Republican Party, has turned into a critical juncture and the priciest judicial election ever recorded in U.S. history.
At a rally on Sunday evening, Musk stated, “We simply want judges to remain impartial,” before presenting two $1 million (£750,000) checks to voters who had signed a petition aimed at halting what he referred to as “activist” judges.
Kaul attempted to contend that the giveaway was an unlawful effort to purchase votes. In reply, Musk’s legal representatives asserted that Kaul is “hindering Mr. Musk’s political expression and infringing upon his First Amendment rights.”
Musk’s legal representatives further stated that the payments aimed “to foster a popular movement opposing activist judges, rather than directly supporting or criticizing any particular candidate.”
Following support from two lower courts for Musk, Kaul urgently appealed to the state’s Supreme Court for a last-minute stay. However, the highest court collectively decided not to consider the case.
Musk and President Donald Trump have supported a conservative candidate, Waukesha County Judge Brad Schimel, with the aim of shifting the balance of the liberal-leaning court.
Judge Schimel is competing against Dane County Judge Susan Crawford, who has received backing from the state Supreme Court’s liberal judges.
Attorneys representing the technology giant contended that judges who have openly supported Judge Crawford in the Supreme Court election ought to be disqualified from presiding over the case, citing potential prejudice as their reasoning.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court election is viewed by political observers as an indicator of public sentiment regarding President Trump’s second term, only a few months following his swearing-in.
This timing is significant as it precedes major cases concerning abortion rights, congressional district boundaries, and voting regulations that might impact the 2026 midterm elections.
Musk has presented the election as an opportunity to prevent redistricting that might provide Democrats with an advantage in Congress.
He has contributed $14 million to Judge Schimel’s campaign, making this race the costliest judicial election in the nation’s history, with overall expenditures reaching $81 million.
Even with his backing, Judge Schimel seemed to pull away from Musk recently. He told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel on Friday that he does not intend to attend the rally.
“I am completely clueless about his actions. I have no idea what this rally is all about,” Judge Schimel stated to the newspaper.
It isn’t the first time that Musk has initiated such a giveaway for voters. In the previous year, he also promised a daily cash reward of $1 million to voters in Wisconsin and seven other key states who agreed to sign a petition advocating for the protection of both the First and Second Amendments.
A judge in Pennsylvania subsequently determined that the giveaway was lawful, stating that prosecutors did not manage to demonstrate it as an illegal lottery.
by admin | Mar 27, 2025 | business, controversies, courts, criminal cases, judiciaries
The High Court at Nairobi’s Milimani Commercial Courts rejected a case brought forth by Davidson Ivusa against Safaricom Limited.
Ivusa alleged that Safaricom took his groundbreaking “Jichomoe” idea, claiming this was the inspiration behind their popular Reverse Call Feature.
The ruling, issued by Judge F.G. Mugambi on February 27, 2025, concluded a legal dispute that started in April 2021.
The lawsuit filed by the plaintiff against Safaricom
Davidson Ivusa, the claimant, initiated lawsuit number Civil Case E562 of 2021 on April 20, 2021. He sought various forms of relief against Safaricom, such as an order to prevent the firm from utilizing or promoting its Reverse Call service. Additionally, he requested compensation for breaches of confidence, misrepresentation, and lost commercial prospects.
Ivusa asserted that he presented a submission to Safaricom on May 10, 2010, under the title “Jichomoe.” He explained this as an answer designed to help Safaricom subscribers place calls irrespective of their economic limitations.
He claimed that the firm maintained his concept under examination for an extended period, continually assuring him of their consideration, before eventually debuting a remarkably comparable feature, the Safaricom Reverse Call Service, on June 18, 2019, without including or consulting him.
Ivusa contended that this was a violation of trust and charged Safaricom with appropriating his idea and presenting it as their own creation.
Safaricom’s defense
In their defense statement submitted on January 17, 2022, Safaricom refuted Ivusa’s claims, stating that its Reverse Call Service was a distinct invention created in June 2018 and introduced on April 26, 2019.
The firm stated that the service was created to cater to the requirements of subscribers who couldn’t make calls because they lacked sufficient airtime. It enabled them to start reverse calls using a specific code.
The telecoms company highlighted that reverse call technology wasn’t new, having preceded Ivusa’s suggestion and being present in different formats long before mobile communications were common.
Safaricom emphasized notable distinctions between its offering and Jichomoe: whereas the Reverse Call Service only covers voice calls, Jichomoe includes voice calls, text messaging, and mobile internet. It operates as an installed module within handsets instead of being a network-based feature.
What was the outcome of the lawsuit involving Safaricom?
Judge Mugambi’s ruling tackled three main points: whether Safaricom violated a trust, if it had misappropriated Ivusa’s concept, and whether Ivusa was justified in seeking the remedies proposed.
The court discovered no proof of a clear pact or shared comprehension between the involved parties. It highlighted that Ivusa’s presentation of the Jichomoe idea was unrequested, with nothing suggesting that Safaricom consented to keep it confidential or utilize it for his advantage.
Regarding the allegation of passing off, where one entity falsely presents another’s goods as their own, the court necessitated that Ivusa demonstrate that Jichomoe possessed goodwill and brand recognition. Additionally, Ivusa needed to show that Safaricom’s services were misleading about their source and that this misrepresentation caused damage to Ivusa.
Mugambi stated that Ivusa did not provide any proof of Jichomoe’s market position, brand awareness, or financial harm resulting from Safaricom’s activities.
Even though Ivusa didn’t directly accuse anyone of copyright infringement, the court examined whether his intellectual property had been violated. According to Kenya’s Copyright Act, software receives protection as a form of literary work; however, this law safeguards only the expression of an idea rather than the concept itself.
The court determined that since Jichomoe did not provide concrete details like source code or prototypes, Ivusa was unable to demonstrate that Safaricom had replicated his distinctive creation instead of separately devising a comparable idea.
Justice Mugambi dismissed the suit with costs awarded to Safaricom after finding no merit with the lawsuits claims.
by admin | Mar 25, 2025 | churches, courts, government, politics, politics and law
A court in Tokyo has directed the Unification Church in Japan to dissolve, as requested by the nation’s government.
The church, officially named the Family Federation for World Peace and Unification, faced greater examination following the 2022 assassination of ex-Prime Minister Shinzo Abe.
The suspected killer alleges that the church caused his mother’s financial ruin, and he holds Abe responsible for his party’s connection to it.
In 2023, Japan’s education ministry requested the disbandment of the church, alleging that it had caused harm to its members and their families via deceptive funding and enrollment practices.
In support of their submission, the governmental body presented 5,000 files and evidentiary items to the court, derived from over 170 witness interviews.
In its decision regarding the case, the Tokyo District Court declared on Tuesday that it would be rescinding the official recognition of the religious group based in South Korea, commonly referred to as Moonies by its adherents. The term “Moonies” originates from the surname of the church’s founder and self-declared Messiah, Sun Myung Moon.
If the group fails to overturn this ruling effectively, they stand to lose their tax-free status and will be required to sell off all their holdings within Japan.
The church, which has expressed consideration for filing an appeal, described Tuesday’s ruling as “totally unacceptable,” asserting that the court provided “an incorrect legal interpretation.”
For the first time, a religious group in Japan is facing the consequences of a revocation order as per the nation’s civil code.
The Unification Church, established in Seoul in 1954, gained official recognition in Japan during the 1960s. This development is believed to have received backing from Abe’s grandfather, ex-Prime Minister Nobusuke Kishi.
After Abe’s murder during a political event, attention was drawn to the connections between the church and Japan’s governing Liberal Democratic Party.
In 2022, former Prime Minister Fumio Kishida conducted a cabinet reshuffle that led to the removal of seven officials associated with the church. Prior to this, Economy Minister Daishiro Yamagiwa stepped down due to his connections to the same group.
by admin | Mar 24, 2025 | courts, judiciaries, news, politics, politics and law
On Monday (today), a larger bench of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) will reconvene hearings for over 20 cases linked to meetings involving Imran Khan. This expanded panel, led by Acting Chief Justice Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar along with Justices Arbab Muhammad Tahir and Azam Khan, will continue their proceedings. At the previous session, Adiala Jail Superintendent Abdul Ghafoor Anjum testified before the court asserting that Khan had received unscheduled visits exceeding the guidelines set forth in the jail manual.
In response, the IHC bench instructed the jail authorities to submit a comprehensive report and asked them to explain the protocols observed during these visits. Concerning this issue, the Acting Chief Justice of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) established a broader panel to examine matters associated with interactions between officials and PTI leader Imran Khan at Adiala Jail.
Previously, a divisional bench presided over by Judge Dogar ruled that all cases pertaining to encounters with Imran Khan should be combined into one case file and addressed collectively before a larger tribunal. This directive was delivered when the bench considered a plea submitted by Adiala Jail’s acting warden, Abdul Ghafoor Anjum, requesting the amalgamation of various lawsuits concerning Imran Khan’s visitations.
The prison official filed the application via legal representative Naveed Malik, asserting that standard operating procedures for such meetings had been finalized within internal appeals; however, numerous separate panels continued to handle analogous requests.
He argued that the superintendent, who oversees thousands of inmates, must appear before the IHC five days each week, emphasizing that consolidating cases was crucial for improving efficiency. The petitioner pointed out numerous outstanding petitions concerning Khan’s visiting privileges, along with contradictory rulings from various courts regarding this matter.
He argued, “To maintain judicial coherence, it is crucial for all interconnected cases to be combined before either a unified or an expanded panel. This ensures consistent rulings and facilitates the proper implementation of legal instructions.” Anjum stated further, “Denying this plea will lead to irreversible damage to the petitioner and undermine the smooth management of correctional facilities.”
Superintendent Anjum clarified that Khan was provided accommodations according to established protocols outlined in March 2024. These included scheduled meetings with attorneys, relatives, and acquaintances twice weekly. Additionally, he mentioned that Khan could occasionally communicate via WhatsApp calls with his children based on compassionate considerations. Furthermore, Khan enjoyed access to all benefits afforded by the Pakistan Prison Rules of 1978.
He additionally mentioned that the Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) were revised in November 2024, stipulating that the petitioner—the superintendent—must obtain the list of visitors directly from Khan. This requirement was adhered to by the relevant authorities as well.
The petition asserted, “As per Article 5 of the Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, every executive and judicial authority holds an unbreakable obligation to adhere to the Constitution and statutory laws.”
The presence of numerous comparable appeals concerning Respondent No. 1’s visiting privileges before various divisions of the Islamabad High Court (IHC) and the delivery of inconsistent rulings have posed significant challenges and ambiguity for the prison authorities,” argued the petitioner. Consequently, he requested that these connected cases be assigned to one unified division or an enlarged panel within this court to guarantee consistent judgment and efficient enforcement of legal directives in the pursuit of fairness.
Provided by SyndiGate Media Inc.
Syndigate.info
).
