Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

<ul><li>A committee of seven <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> judges is inclined to begin physical hearings in at least two or three of its 15 benches as early as next week, said sources familiar with the development. The top court could also begin hearings with some <keyword id="8036442" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="additional-safety-measures">additional safety measures</keyword>.</li><li>Since March 25, the top court has been taking up matters through video conferencing and even after the restrictions were relaxed, it has decided to continue to take up cases virtually.</li><li>The seven-judge committee headed by Justice N.V. Ramana, in the last week of July, had told the Bar leaders that it is not inclined to resume open court hearing for the time being, and told them the committee will meet again after two weeks to examine the matter</li></ul> A committee of seven Supreme Court judges is inclined to begin physical hearings in at least two or three of its 15 benches as early as next week, said sources familiar with the development. The top court could also begin hearings with some additional safety measures. According to Shivaji M. Jadhav, president of Supreme Court Advocates on Record Association (SCAORA), the committee of seven judges, constituted by Chief Justice S.A. Bobde, met the Bar leaders on Tuesday and "is seriously considering to start at least 2-3 physical courts from the next week". Since March 25, the top court has been taking up matters through video conferencing and even after the restrictions were relaxed, it has decided to continue to take up cases virtually. The seven-judge committee headed by Justice N.V. Ramana, in the last week of July, had told the Bar leaders that it is not inclined to resume open court hearing for the time being, and told them the committee will meet again after two weeks to examine the matter. "I may also add that the physical courts are in addition to virtual courts and people would have the option to do virtual hearing as well. Matters from the final hearing list published before the lockdown would be listed before the physical courts. A final decision would be taken by the Hon'ble Judges committee in a day or two", said Jadhav. He added that in the meantime the Registry would take necessary steps to prepare the courts for physical functioning. The judges' committee met Bar leaders such as Bar Council Chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra, Supreme Court Bar Association President <keyword id="276004" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Dushyant-Dave">Dushyant Dave</keyword> and <keyword id="185208" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Shivaji-Jadhav">Shivaji Jadhav</keyword> to discuss the process to resume physical hearings in the apex court. In June and July, the judges' committee did not agree to the demands of various lawyers' associations to resume regular courtroom hearings, and instead said that it will review it later. <keyword id="9751392" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="justices-ramana">Justices Ramana</keyword>, Arun Mishra, Rohinton Nariman, U.U. Lalit, A.M. Khanwilkar, D.Y. Chandrachud and L.N. Rao are on the committee set up by the Chief Justice to examine the issues connected with the resumption of physical hearings. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/world/news/trump-was-rushed-from-the-briefing-room-by-secret-service-after-a-shooting-outside-of-the-white-house/articleshow/77474005.cms">Trump was rushed from the briefing room by Secret Service after a shooting outside the White House</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/careers/news/mckinsey-facebook-amazon-nokia-and-some-other-companies-looking-for-a-product-manager-right-now/slidelist/77464438.cms">McKinsey, Facebook, Amazon, Nokia — and some other companies looking for a product manager right now</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/how-karan-bajaj-sold-his-less-than-18-month-old-startup-white-hat-jr-to-byjus/articleshow/77415329.cms">A WhatsApp message, six weeks of talks and a $300 million deal – how Karan Bajaj sold his less than 18-month old startup White Hat Jr to Byju’s</a>

Supreme Court likely to begin physical hearing in some courts from next week

With increasing incidents of electric two-wheelers catching fire, <keyword id="6357801" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="union" source="Orion">Union</keyword> minister <keyword id="26680" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="nitin-gadkari" source="Orion">Nitin Gadkari</keyword> on Thursday said the government will issue necessary orders on defaulting companies after receiving the report of an expert panel that has been formed to enquire into the matter. In a series of tweets, <keyword id="6361025" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="gadkari" source="Orion">Gadkari</keyword> said several mishaps involving electric two-wheelers have come to light in the last two months. "We have constituted an expert committee to enquire into these incidents and make recommendations on remedial steps. "Based on the reports, we will issue necessary orders on the defaulting companies," the road transport and highways minister said. Gadkari added: "We will soon issue quality-centric guidelines for <keyword id="6354973" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="electric-vehicles" source="Orion">Electric Vehicles</keyword>." The minister asserted that if any company is found negligent in its processes, a heavy penalty will be imposed and a recall of all defective vehicles will also be ordered. Meanwhile, companies may take advance action to recall all defective batches of vehicles immediately, Gadkari tweeted. "Under the leadership of PM Shri @narendramodi ji, our government is committed to ensure safety of each and every commuter," he tweeted. The government had ordered a probe last month after an e-scooter launched by ride-hailing operator <keyword id="6354720" type="General" weightage="50" keywordseo="ola" source="Orion">Ola</keyword>'s electric mobility arm caught fire in Pune. The Centre for Fire Explosive and Environment Safety (CFEES) had been asked to probe the circumstances that led to the incident and also suggest remedial measures, according to the road transport ministry. The ministry had also asked CFEES to share the findings along with its suggestions on measures to prevent such incidents. SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/indian-startups-have-already-laid-off-over-5700-employees-in-the-last-four-months/slidelist/90980198.cms">Indian startups have already laid off over 5,700 employees in the last four months</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/if-you-want-to-remove-encroachments-go-to-south-delhi-not-target-the-poor-in-jahangirpuri-dushyant-dave/articleshow/90978249.cms">"If you want to remove encroachments, go to south Delhi, not target the poor in Jahangirpuri" : Dushyant Dave</a>

Government to take action against defaulting EV firms in e-scooter fire accidents, says Nitin Gadkari

<ul><li><keyword id="2721952" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="crypto" source="Orion">Crypto</keyword> firms around the world have seen <keyword id="6356662" type="General" weightage="80" keywordseo="singapore" source="Orion">Singapore</keyword> as a favourable destination for doing business.</li><li>Singapore passed the Financial Services and Markets bill earlier this month that provides special powers to the regulator around crypto.</li><li>Dubai could benefit from such a move.</li></ul>The cryptocurrency industry may lose one of its favourite destinations. Singapore, which is a favourite for such firms along with Dubai, Wyoming, and more, has passed a legislation called the Financial Services and Markets Bill, which requires crypto firms based in the country but exclusively serving companies overseas to obtain a special licence to do business. The bill was passed earlier this month and will impact firms from India and other countries that have been incorporating in Singapore to escape regulatory hassles in their home countries. It could also set a precedent for other countries, allowing them to tax crypto firms based within their borders but earn profits in overseas markets. To be sure, <a href="https://wazirx.com/signup?invite=2kpah6gr&amp;utm_source=business-insider&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=article-editorial">crypto</a> service providers in Singapore are also regulated by the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS). However, the new law enhances the regulator’s power and allows it to look into services providers who are exclusively serving overseas markets. It also shows that authorities in Singapore may not be willing to be as kind towards the crypto industry as in some other geographies.<div type="ExtQuote" text="&quot; We could be exposed to reputational risks brought by digital token service providers created in Singapore, and which provide services relating to virtual assets such as Bitcoin outside Singapore. The FSM Bill seeks to mitigate such risks by licensing these players and imposing AML/CFT requirements on them. &quot;" auname="Alive Tan, a board member at the MAS, said in Singapore’s Parliament, while passing the bill earlier this month."></div>"We could be exposed to reputational risks brought by digital token service providers created in Singapore, and which provide services relating to virtual assets such as Bitcoin outside Singapore. The FSM Bill seeks to mitigate such risks by licensing these players and imposing AML/CFT requirements on them. " Alive Tan, a board member at the MAS, <a href="https://asia.nikkei.com/Spotlight/Cryptocurrencies/Singapore-s-crypto-players-face-added-scrutiny-under-new-law">said</a> in Singapore’s Parliament, while passing the bill earlier this month. The MAS itself had <a href="https://www.mas.gov.sg/news/media-releases/2022/mas-issues-guidelines-to-discourage-cryptocurrency-trading-by-general-public">issued</a> guidelines meant to “discourage” the public from investing in cryptocurrencies in January this year. “MAS strongly encourages the development of blockchain technology and innovative application of crypto tokens in value-adding use cases. But the trading of cryptocurrencies is highly-risky and not suitable for the general public. DPT service providers should therefore not portray the trading of DPTs in a manner that trivialises the high risks of trading in DPTs, nor engage in marketing activities that target the general public,” said Loo Siew Yee, MAS Assistant Managing Director (Policy, Payments, and Financial Crime), at the time. <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="Tighter crypto norms: Singapore’s loss, Dubai’s gain" comment="subhead" text="Tighter crypto norms: Singapore’s loss, Dubai’s gain">Tighter crypto norms: Singapore’s loss, Dubai’s gain</cmsannotation> However, this could be a boon for Dubai, which has been setting itself up to become a haven for blockchain, web3, and cryptocurrency firms. The Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (VARA), set up by Dubai earlier this month, offers a way for web3 firms to operate as licensed operators within that state. The authority also has powers to regulate token issuance by crypto firms, audit such tokens, and look into other aspects of the industry. SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/corporates/news/itc-acquires-10-stake-in-mylo-a-mom-and-child-care-direct-to-consumer-brand/articleshow/90975801.cms">ITC acquires a 10% stake in this mom-and-child care brand as it looks to hop onto the D2C train</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/if-you-want-to-remove-encroachments-go-to-south-delhi-not-target-the-poor-in-jahangirpuri-dushyant-dave/articleshow/90978249.cms">"If you want to remove encroachments, go to south Delhi, not target the poor in Jahangirpuri" : Dushyant Dave</a>

Crypto companies in Singapore to face more heat as it tightens rules and seeks more control

<ul><li>Lawyer and activist <keyword id="6368850" type="DEFINITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="prashant-bhushan">Prashant Bhushan</keyword> is held guilty by the <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> of India over two tweets criticising the judiciary and the <keyword id="45053" type="POSITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Chief-Justice-of-India">Chief Justice of India</keyword> (CJI). </li><li>“An attempt to shake the very foundation of constitutional democracy has to be dealt with an iron hand,” the court said in its judgement.</li><li>Details of his punishment will be announced next week on August 20.</li></ul>You can’t quite say everything on Twitter and you need not look further than lawyer and activist Prashant Bhushan for proof. Today, the Indian Supreme Court held him guilty of <keyword id="6386386" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="Contempt-of-Court">contempt of court</keyword> over two tweets that he sent out which were critical of the judiciary and the Chief Justice of India. The hearing to decide his punishment will be held on August 20. <div type="twitter" handle="barandbench" handlename="Bar &amp; Bench" image="http://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1248497186402258945/izmXCMgD_normal.jpg" favoritecount="45" retweetcount="14" status="Hearing on the quantum of punishment to be held on August 20@pbhushan1 #SupremeCourt #PrashantBhushan" createdat="1597384000000" id="1294148413378818048"></div> “An attempt to shake the very foundation of constitutional democracy has to be dealt with an iron hand,” the court said in its judgement. “The tweet has the effect of destabilising the very foundation of this important pillar of Indian democracy,” in added. According to the Supreme Court, the tweets gave the impression that the judiciary had a vital role to play in the ‘destruction of Indian democracy’ in an attempt to shake public confidence. It's a question of freedom of speech The bench — comprising Justices Arun Mishra, B R Gavai and Krishna Murari — had earlier reserved judgement when the case was heard on August 5. Bhushan’s representation, Dushyant Dave argued that his client was only exercising his freedom of speech. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="77107560" title="Tweets criticising India's Supreme Court get tagged as 'hate speech' and incur the judge's wrath ⁠— Twitter caught in the crossfire" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div> Dave told the court his client’s comments were not out of malice, but out of love and affection for the court. “It's not personal. We all want the court to be stronger. This is what the constitution says regarding the separation of power..citizen may question,” Dave told the bench during the hearing<a href="https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/comments-were-not-out-of-malice-prashant-bhushan-tells-sc-reserves-orders-on-contempt-case-160990">.</a> Bhushan also filed a reply affidavit to the contempt notice, where he argued that the tweets are not obstructing the administration of justice, only against judges in their personal capacity regarding conduct. The Supreme Court’s judgement argues that the question of whether the tweets were made in good faith or not is impacted by the reach of a social networking platform like Twitter. “The publication by tweet reaches millions of people and as such, such a huge extent of publication would also be one of the factors that requires to be taken into consideration while consider the question of good faith,” the court said. The tweets in question The contempt notice was originally filed on July 22 against two of Bushan’s tweets on the judiciary and the Chief Justice of India, S A Bobde. <div type="image" title="bushan tweet 1_edited" msid="77539466" hostid="261" caption="&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;Prashant Bhushan&amp;#39;s tweet on June 27&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt;"></div> <div type="image" title="bushan tweet 2_edited" msid="77539482" hostid="261" caption="&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;Prashant Bhushan&amp;#39;s tweet calling out CJI&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt;"></div> SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/finance/banks/news/hdfc-banks-aditya-puri-believes-sashidhar-jagdishan-is-the-worthiest-person-to-succeed-him/articleshow/77540644.cms">HDFC Bank's Aditya Puri believes Sashidhar Jagdishan is the 'worthiest person' to succeed him</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/science/space/news/nasas-mars-helicopter-recharges-its-batteries-for-the-very-first-time-en-route-to-the-red-planet/articleshow/77539101.cms">NASA's Mars Helicopter recharges its batteries for the very first time en route to the Red Planet</a>

Supreme Court wields the ‘iron hand’ in holding Prashant Bhushan guilty for tweets critical of judiciary and chief justice

<ul><li>Six judges of the Supreme Court are suffering from <keyword id="6545722" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="h1n1">H1N1</keyword> virus popularly known as <keyword id="43489" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Swine-flu">swine flu</keyword>, following which they did not attend court. </li><li>Separately, 37 people were infected with H1N1 for the virus in Meerut. Health authorities have seen a rise in swine flu cases across the country. </li><li>Supreme Court has decided to vaccinate the lawyers to ensure it does not spread. </li></ul>As many as six judges of the Supreme Court are suffering from H1N1 virus popularly known as swine flu. Justice DY Chandrachud announced that all apex court judges held a meeting with Chief Justice of India to discuss the situation. Sanjiv Khanna, an apex court judge came to the court wearing a mask. Supreme Court has decided to vaccinate the lawyers to ensure it does not spread. Lawyers as well as bar association chief should also take the initiative for preventive measures against the disease, Justice Chandrachud said. Meanwhile, a meeting was held with Supreme Court Bar Association President Dushyant Dave to tackle the health emergency.A few foreign delegation members who participated in a judicial conference in the apex court complex recently were also infected by the virus, Dave told IANS. Separately, 37 people were infected with H1N1 for the virus in Meerut. Health authorities have seen a rise in swine flu cases across the country. Last week, German software giant SAP was forced to temporarily shut down all its offices in the country after two of their employees tested positive for the H1N1 virus. Both swine flu and <keyword id="1754604" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="coronavirus">Coronavirus</keyword> have almost symptoms. “The symptoms of H1N1 disease are quite similar to common flu, due to which more people are becoming drug resistant. It is essential for people, especially children, to consume food which gives their body the energy and nutrients it needs to function,” Dr Swati Rajagopal, <a href="https://indianexpress.com/article/parenting/health-fitness/with-swine-flu-having-made-a-comeback-in-india-heres-what-doctors-want-you-to-know-6283883/">Consultant-Infectious Disease at the Aster CMI Hospital in Bangalore told Indian Express</a>. Last month, Amritsar reported one death owing to swine flu. <keyword id="6354495" type="LOCATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="kashmir">Kashmir</keyword> has not yet seen any case of coronavirus but a spurt in swine flu (H1N1) numbers continues to pose a threat in the region. Officials said last week that as many as 18 cases of swine flu have been admitted to SKIMS, Srinagar. See also: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/science/news/italy-put-12-towns-on-coronavirus-lockdown-after-215-cases-and-5-deaths-made-it-the-most-infected-country-outside-of-asia/articleshow/74286597.cms">Italy put 12 towns on coronavirus lockdown after 215 cases and 5 deaths made it the most-infected country outside of Asia</a>

Supreme Court hastens to vaccinate staff and lawyers after 6 judges are affected by swine flu

<ul><li>The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> has hinted that it may issue a stay on India’s new <keyword id="9970645" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="farm-laws">farm laws</keyword> today to assuage the farmers’ protests in New Delhi.</li><li>The apex court is ‘extremely disappointed’ with the central government’s handling of the protests thus far.</li><li>It also clarified that granting a stay is not to stifle the protests, but asking the protesters to relocate allowing for the free movement of vehicles is on the cards.</li></ul>As the farmers’ protests along the borders of New Delhi refuse to subside, the Supreme Court has stepped in and asked the central government to make up its mind. “You tell us whether the government is going to put on hold farm laws or we will do this,” said the bench headed by the <keyword id="45053" type="POSITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Chief-Justice-of-India">Chief Justice of India</keyword> (CJI) <keyword id="2193113" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="SA-Bobde">SA Bobde</keyword>. He told the government that an order might be passed today in part and then again tomorrow. <div type="image" title="tractor rally_edited" msid="80212638" hostid="261" caption="&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;Tractor rally at New Delhi&amp;#39;s Singhu border on January 7 protesting India&amp;#39;s new farm laws&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt;"></div> The Supreme Court expressed its ‘extreme disappointment’ with the progress of negotiations between the farmers and the government. “What consultative process has been followed for farm bills that entire states are up in rebellion,” said Bodbe. “We propose to form a committee and if the government does not then we will stay the implementation of the farm acts.” The Attorney General hit back, saying that a stay on the farm laws would be too ‘drastic’ a measure. “We do not think the Centre is handling the issue correctly. We have to take some action today. We don't think you are being effective,” the CJI told him. “We are doing this because you have failed to solve the problem… Union of India has to take responsibility.” Supreme Court asserts it’s not stifling the protests The Supreme Court defended its move to set up a committee by asserting that it is not an attempt to stifle the protests — the protests can carry on. The question is whether protests should be held at the same site or be shifted to accommodate the free movement of citizens. <div type="image" title="AC69E465-0A6B-413F-ADFC-DA02C46FB15F_edited" msid="80212680" hostid="261" caption="&amp;lt;p&amp;gt;Farmers protesting at India&amp;#39;s Singhu border against India&amp;#39;s new farm laws&amp;lt;/p&amp;gt;"></div> “As a court, we will not pass any order saying that you cannot protest. But we can say that it is not the only place to protest,” he said. One of the primary issues is the possibility of farmers interrupting the Republic Day parade with a tractor rally. “Nothing of that sort will happen,” Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave, representing the farmers’ unions, told the court. “Every member from a Punjab family is in the army. No one is going to disturb the republic day parade. We have been asking for three months to let us protest in Ramlila Maidan. Why can't they be allowed to go there?” India’s national capital has been surrounded by farmers for over a month protesting the country’s three new farm laws. Despite numerous rounds of talks between the government and the farmer unions, the two have been unable to reach a mutually acceptable agreement. As a result, petitions have been filed with the Supreme Court seeking the removal of the farmers near Delhi borders due to COVID-19. Petitions have also been filed challenging the constitutional validity of India’s three new farm laws. “Frankly we have an apprehension that there will be some incident which may breach the peace. It may be intended or unintended,” said Bodbe sharing his concerns. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/ecommerce/news/radhakishan-damani-dmart-ready-takes-cautious-steps-against-jiomart-and-amazon/articleshow/80209971.cms">Pitted against JioMart, Amazon and others, Radhakishan Damani’s DMart has opted for “controlled acceleration” in e-commerce</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/2021-will-be-a-watershed-moment-for-india-tech-ecosystem-here-are-the-startup-sectors-that-vcs-are-betting-on/articleshow/80208631.cms">‘2021 will be a watershed moment for India’s tech ecosystem’ — here are the startup sectors that VCs are betting on</a>

‘You tell us whether government is going to put on hold farm laws or we will do this,’ Supreme Court tells Centre

New Delhi, Jul 15 () The Supreme Court Wednesday asked the Jammu and Kashmir administration to explain the basis for detaining high court's bar leader Mian Abdul Qayoom who has challenged his detention under Public Safety Act (PSA) since August 7 last year. The top court asked it to take into consideration various aspects including Qayoom's age, expiry of detention period and the COVID-19 pandemic. A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Indu Malhotra posted the matter for July 23 after Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for J-K, said that he needs 10 days time to consider various aspects. "We want to know on what basis you (J-K administration) would like to detain him in Delhi's Tihar Jail. Moreover, his detention as per order has already expired," the bench said. At the outset, Mehta said he had not received the copy of the plea and sought time to reply to it. Senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for Qayoom, said the detention order was for a limited period, for around one year. The bench said that was the reason it has issued notice on the plea during the last date of hearing. Dave replied that he understands why the Solicitor General was uncomfortable and complained that the present matter was not listed despite specific directions of the court. Justice Kaul told Mehta that firstly his detention period has expired and secondly his ideology remains the same. Dave pointed out that Qayoom is 73 years old and should not be kept in Tihar jail. "In the current scenario of COVID-19 would you like to keep this petition pending," the bench told Mehta, who said that Qayoom's ideology remained the same. The bench said it understands all these issues but sometimes there are compulsions which need to be complied with. It told Mehta that he should respond by next date considering Qayoom's age, expiry of his detention order and the COVID-19 times. On June 26, the top court had issued notice to the J-K administration and sought its reply on Qayoom's plea challenging his detention order. Qayoom has also sought a direction to shift him from Tihar jail here to central jail in Srinagar on medical ground. He has challenged the May 28 order of the Jammu and Kashmir High Court rejecting his plea against his prolonged "illegal detention" under the PSA in jails outside the UT. He said he is a Senior Advocate with more than 40 years' standing at the Bar and has served as President of the J&amp;K High Court Bar Association for many terms, including from 2014 till the present day. Qayoom said he was detained on the intervening night of August 4th and 5th, 2019, under the provisions of Jammu and Kashmir Code of Criminal Procedure and thereafter, an order of detention under the PSA was passed against him on August 7, 2019. He said that on August 8 he was taken to Central Jail, Agra, Uttar Pradesh, without any prior notice of intimation, where he was kept in solitary confinement. He said the high court's May 28 order is ex facie unsustainable in law as it is premised on "stale, irrelevant, remote, vague, imprecise and deficient" grounds of detention. "The impugned judgment and order concluded that most of the grounds in the detention order "are somewhat clumsy" which implies that the High Court too found them wanting. Placing reliance on the doctrine of severability as enunciated by this Court in Gautam Jain versus Union of India...the High Court then proceeds to uphold the detention order solely on one ground," his appeal said. He said the high court makes it abundantly clear that the detention order has been upheld solely on one ground -- the four FIRs dating back to 2008 and 2010, as enumerated in the detention order. "These FIRs are stale, irrelevant and have no proximate, pertinent or live link to the present, and are thus superfluous and extraneous to the satisfaction required in law qua the tendency or propensity to act in a manner prejudicial to public order. Pertinently, even in the said decade old 4 FIRs, the Petitioner was neither arrested, nor any charge sheet ever filed by the police against the Petitioner," he added in his plea. Qayoom said he had already been detained in 2010 on the basis of the said FIRs under the PSA, and the said detention was subsequently revoked. "Thus, the same FIRs cannot be used to pass another order of detention under the PSA, as held by this Hon'ble Court…," his plea said. Qayoom said he is suffering from serious health ailments and is at a high-risk vulnerability for COVID-19 due to his co-morbid conditions. "The Petitioner has numerous serious medical conditions for which he has been receiving treatment for the last 25 years under the care and supervision of his doctors in Srinagar, Kashmir. The Petitioner is also dependent on his family for ensuring the regular and daily intake of medicines and regular injections," he added. As an interim prayer, he sought his transfer to Central Jail, Srinagar, during the pendency of the present petition, ensuring that all necessary medical precautions are taken qua COVID-19. MNL ABA SJK SA

SC asks J-K admin to explain detaining bar leader after expiry of order under PSA

<ul><li>The <keyword id="3457213" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="internet-freedom-foundation">Internet Freedom Foundation</keyword> (IFF) wants Twitter to explain why it removed Prashant Bushan’s controversial tweets even though no legal request was issued to that effect. </li><li>According to the internet rights body, Twitter’s ‘proactively’ removal amounts to an impediment of the right to free speech and freedom of expression.</li><li>For Twitter, removing Bhushan’s tweet led to an acquittal from the case.</li></ul>Twitter may have wrangled itself free from the clutches of India’s <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> by removing activist and lawyer <keyword id="6368850" type="DEFINITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="prashant-bhushan">Prashant Bhushan</keyword>’s tweets from the social networking platform, but there are others who believe that the social networking giant has some explaining to do. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="77649463" title="Prashant Bhushan rejects Supreme Court's offer to delay sentence but is given two to three days to reconsider statement" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div> The Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF), an internet rights body, has written to Twitter questioning its move to ‘proactively’ remove Bhushan’s tweets from the platform without any directive being issued to that effect by the courts. That too before any decision was made on whether Bhushan is ‘guilty of contempt’. "Twitter is committed to defending and protecting freedom of expression in India and around the globe. Nonetheless, Twitter endeavors at all times to comply with local law and Twitter’s action in this case is consistent with local legal standard," the social networking platform said with respect to IFF's letter. Removing the tweets led to the Supreme Court acquitting Twitter from Bhushan’s case ruling that, “The intention of <keyword id="749437" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Twitter-India">Twitter India</keyword> would not be considered against the court.” <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="77107560" title="Tweets criticising India's Supreme Court get tagged as 'hate speech' and incur the judge's wrath ⁠— Twitter caught in the crossfire" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div> Others see it as an abuse of power. “By proactively censoring online content in the absence of any direction from a court mandating the same, Twitter’s actions in the case against Bhushan have set a dangerous precedent for free speech,” said <a href="https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Gow1p29T-4_ODJJBKvG47L1NZ78dAlwRMNGNzf1rHJA/viewform?edit_requested=true">IFF’s letter to Twitter.</a> Twitter jumps the gun The Twitter feud in India stems from two tweets that Bhushan put out criticising the Chief Justice of India, Ashok Bhushan, and the Indian judiciary. Twitter was called upon to explain why the tweets were not taken down. Defending Twitter India, senior advocate Sajan Poovayya, explained that necessary instructions need to be given to Twitter for them to take down the tweet. He added that the proper authority to address the issue lies with Twitter’s global office in California — not India. “The issuance of notice by the Supreme Court does not amount to a determination of illegality in any way,” explains IFF’s letter. However, before the second hearing, the tweets disappeared from the platform and was replaced with the message, “This Tweet from @pbhushan1 has been withheld in response to a legal demand.” This even as IFF asserts that no legal demand was filed. “The removal of the actual tweets from Twitter’s platform does not serve any purpose except erasure of the historical record, especially in the absence of a clear and specific judicial direction requiring the same,” says the advocacy group’s letter. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="77539437" title="Supreme Court wields the ‘iron hand’ in holding Prashant Bhushan guilty for tweets critical of judiciary and chief justice" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div> The letter is led by Bhushan’s lawyer, Dushyant Dave and has a 100 signatories so far. According to the social network's latest Transparency Report, India already ranks fifth-highest in terms of removal requests globally after Japan, Russia, Turkey, and South Korea. Updated: Earlier version did not include Twitter's comment on IFF's letter. Countries ahead of India in terms of removal requests also was not included. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/apps/news/google-eyes-indias-sharechat-as-microsoft-goes-after-tiktok-in-the-us-heres-why-it-makes-sense/articleshow/77667345.cms">Google eyes India’s ShareChat as Microsoft goes after TikTok in the US — here’s why it makes sense</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/apps/news/gmail-down-users-report-being-unable-to-send-emails-and-attach-files/articleshow/77648762.cms">Gmail is working again — Google fixes issue without explaining what went wrong</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/science/space/news/isro-chandrayaan-2-identifies-craters-that-may-have-water-after-mapping-4-million-square-kilometres-of-the-moon-in-its-first-year/slidelist/77667105.cms">ISRO’s Chandrayaan 2 identifies craters that may have water after mapping 4 million square kilometres of the Moon in its first year</a>

Twitter's decision to 'proactively' remove Prashant Bhushan's tweets opposed by internet rights body

<ul><li>An in-house committee said there was no substance in the allegations. </li><li>Last month, allegations of sexual harassment were made by a former woman employee of the <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword>.</li><li>A report submitted by the committee is “not liable to be made public."</li></ul> <keyword id="45053" type="POSITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Chief-Justice-of-India">Chief Justice of India</keyword> <keyword id="245445" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Ranjan-Gogoi">Ranjan Gogoi</keyword> has been cleared of the allegations of sexual harassment brought forward last month by a former woman employee of the Supreme Court. An in-house committee, which had been set up to probe into the matter, reportedly said there was no substance in the allegations. The committee was headed by Justice SA Bobde, and Justices Indira Banerjee and Indu Malhotra. A report submitted by the committee is “not liable to be made public,” LiveLaw reported citing a statement by the court. In April, the Supreme Court had announced that a woman staffer had accused the chief justice of sexual harassment and announced the formation of a judicial panel. Gogoi had rejected all the charges. Last week, the complainant reportedly <a href="https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/breaking-in-house-committee-finds-no-substance-in-allegations-against-cji-report-not-liable-to-be-made-public-144825">withdr</a>ew from the probe, objecting to the committee saying she felt she “was not likely to get justice from this committee. She also cited the lack of a lawyer or a support person and felt "intimidated and nervous in the presence of three Hon'ble Judges of the Supreme Court,” she was quoted as saying in media <a href="https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/breaking-woman-who-alleged-sexual-harassment-by-cji-decides-not-to-participate-in-in-house-enquiry-144658">reports.</a> Many lawyers have also raised concerns about the findings. Writing in <a href="https://www.thehindu.com/opinion/lead/a-miscarriage-of-justice/article27051604.ece/amp/?__twitter_impression=true" data-type="tilCustomLink">the Hindu</a>, Dushyant Dave, a senior lawyer and the former President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, says, "Can [the complainant] and her family get justice at all at the hands of the judiciary, considering the respondents would be the CJI and the Supreme Court? Only time will tell. But certainly for the present, the picture is dark for them."

Judicial panel clears Chief Justice of India from sexual harassment charges

New Delhi, Apr 7 () The Supreme Court Tuesday directed all sates and Union Territories to ensure through Director Generals of Police (DGPs) that prisoners released from jails get safe transit, so that they can reach their homes amid the lockdown due to coronavirus.The top court said the prisoners be given an option of staying in temporary shelter homes during the period of lockdown. A bench of Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justice L Nageswara Rao issued the directions in the matter taken up suo motu (on its own) on the conditions of prisons during coronavirus pandemic.Senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appointed amicus curiae by the top court, said the prisoners who have been released according to the guidelines framed by the High-Powered Committees in various states are stranded because they have no means to reach their homes. Attorney General K K Venugopal said it is very unjust that the prisoners who are released have been left stranded in absence of any transportation. "In these circumstances, we consider it appropriate to direct that Union of India shall ensure that all the prisoners having been released by the States/Union Territories are not left stranded and they are provided transportation to reach their homes or given the option to stay in temporary shelter homes for the period of lockdown," the bench said. It added that for this purpose, the Centre may issue appropriate directions under the Disaster Management Act, 2005 or any other law for the time being in force. "We further direct that the States/Union Territories shall ensure through Directors General of Police to provide safe transit to the prisoners who have been released so that they may reach their homes. They shall also be given an option for staying in temporary shelter homes during the period of lockdown. Ordered accordingly," the bench said.The top court had on March 23, directed all states and UTs to constitute high-level committees to consider releasing on parole or interim bail prisoners and undertrials for offences entailing up to 7-year jail term to decongest prisons in the wake of coronavirus.It said overcrowding of prisons is a matter of serious concern, particularly in the present context of coronavirus (COVID–19).In regard to the provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, it has become imperative to ensure that the spread of coronavirus within the prisons is controlled, the court had said.The top court had said it would be open for the High Powered Committee to determine the category of prisoners who should be released depending upon the nature of offence, the number of years to which he or she has been sentenced or the severity of the offence with which he/she is charged with and is facing trial or any other relevant factor, which the Committee may consider appropriate.It also directed that the Undertrial Review Committee set up by the court in another matter, shall meet every week and take such decision in consultation with the concerned authority.It had directed that there should not be any delay in shifting sick person to a Nodal Medical Institution in case of any possibility of infection is seen and prison specific readiness and response plans must be developed in consultation with medical experts.The top court added that looking into the possible threat of transmission and fatal consequences, it is necessary that prisons must ensure maximum possible distancing among the prisoners including under trials. On March 16, the top court had taken suo motu cognisance of overcrowding of prisons across the country and said it is difficult for jail inmates to maintain social distancing to prevent the spread of coronavirus. MNL ABA SJK SA

COVID-19: SC asks states, UTs to provide safe transit to prisoners released during lockdown

<ul><li>Activist and lawyer <keyword id="6368850" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="prashant-bhushan">Prashant Bhushan</keyword> has rejected <keyword id="6360390" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="the-supreme-court">the Supreme Court</keyword>'s offer to delay the verdict on the Twitter case against him by another two to three days. </li><li>Bhushan told the bench that he does not wish to reconsider his statement or issue an apology.</li><li>The Supreme Court also rejected Bhushan's plea to defer the hearing in order to file a review plea against the verdict.</li><li>The Attorney General asked the bench to not punish Bhushan at all. </li><li>The bench asserted that it is not possible until Bhushan changes his stance and apologises. </li><li>Has been given another two to three days to reconsider his statement.</li></ul>Activist and lawyer Prashant Bhushan has been in a spot of trouble after two of his tweets made headlines for criticising the judiciary and the Chief Justice of India. India's top court ruled his comments to be in contempt of the court and rejected Bhushan's plea to defer the hearing in order to file a review against the verdict delivered on August 14. However, it also offered Bhushan two to three days to reconsider his position before rolling out the sentence — an offer that Bhushan refused but one that will be upheld nonetheless. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="77107560" title="Tweets criticising India's Supreme Court get tagged as 'hate speech' and incur the judge's wrath ⁠— Twitter caught in the crossfire" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div> The Attorney General (AG) told the judges that it would be tremendously helpful if Bhushan was given some time. However, Bushan responded saying that he doesn't believe time will change where he stands on the issue. "Statement I made was well thought out. It is unlikely that there will be any substantial change in my statement," he said. "As regards to giving time, I don't think it will serve any purpose," he added. Nonetheless, the court has deferred sentencing by another two to three days. The AG subsequently requested for Bhushan to not be punished at all. However, the court maintained that it cannot consider that request until Bhushan reconsiders his earlier stance and apologises for the tweets. Supreme Court rejects Bhushan's plea The Supreme Court also refused Bhushan's plea to defer the hearing that will decide his judgement. According to Justice BR Gavai, Bhushan can file a plea to review the case regardless of whether a sentence is delivered today or not. “Even if we punish you, it won’t be activated until the decision on review. We’ll be fair to you. We feel you are trying to avoid this bench,” said the <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/1296327206453432321">Supreme Court</a> in its decision as Bhushan's representation, Dushyant Dave, pushed for the matter of punishment to be considered by a different set of judges. <div type="Article" hostid="261" msid="77633203" title="Prashant Bhushan is seeking deferment of hearing on sentence until the Supreme Court considers the review plea" mstype="2" mssubtype="0"></div> Sentencing Prashant Bhushan for critical tweets In rolling out its sentence in the case against Bhushan and his tweets, which were critical of India's judicial system, the bench noted that it has taken Bhushan's contributions — pro bono cases — into consideration. However, it added, "The fact you are doing many good things does not mean that your wrongs can be neutralised." The AG pointed out that he has a list of five Supreme Court judges saying that democracy has failed within the system. He also has extracts of statements from retired judges that can attest that there was corruption in higher in the judiciary. Large questions of the 2009 <keyword id="61723" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="contempt-case">contempt case</keyword> The Supreme Court said it would consider certain larger questions in the 2009 contempt case against Prashant Bhushan and journalist <keyword id="119513" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Tarun-Tejpal">Tarun Tejpal</keyword> as the issue before it has wide ramifications. The top court said it would like to hear arguments from the lawyers as to what should be the process which should be followed in contempt cases where allegations are being levelled against judges. A three-judge bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra said it would like to hear the counsels on whether such statements can be made and the procedure to be adopted for dealing with them. The apex court in November 2009, had issued a contempt notice to Bhushan and Tejpal for allegedly casting aspersions on some sitting and former top court judges in an interview to a news magazine, Tehelka. Tejpal was the editor of the magazine. Bhushan told the court on Sunday that making corruption charges against the judges would not amount to contempt of court and mere utterance of corruption charge could not be contempt of court. The top court asked senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for Bhushan, <keyword id="335945" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Shanti-Bhushan">Shanti Bhushan</keyword> and <keyword id="30182" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Kapil-Sibal">Kapil Sibal</keyword> to address it on three issues— whether such statements can be made, in what circumstances they can be made and what is the procedure to be adopted with respect to sitting and retired judges. The bench, also comprising Justices B R Gavai and <keyword id="333383" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Krishna-Murari">Krishna Murari</keyword>, posted the matter for next hearing on August 24. Sibal, appearing for Tarun Tejpal, said the matter should be given quietus (discharged). The bench said that even the court wants to give the case a quietus but it there are certain questions which need consideration. (With PTI inputs) SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/apps/news/tweets-criticising-indias-supreme-court-get-tagged-as-hate-speech-and-incurs-the-judges-wrath-twitter-caught-in-the-crossfire/articleshow/77107560.cms">Tweets criticising India's Supreme Court get tagged as 'hate speech' and incur the judge's wrath ⁠— Twitter caught in the crossfire</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/supreme-court-holds-prashant-bhushan-guilty-of-contempt-of-court-punishment-to-be-announced-on-august-20/articleshow/77539437.cms">Supreme Court wields the ‘iron hand’ in holding Prashant Bhushan guilty for tweets critical of judiciary and chief justice</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/2009-prashant-bhushan-case-back-in-the-spotlight-as-supreme-court-poses-questions-on-contempt/articleshow/77590293.cms">2009 Prashant Bhushan contempt case back in the spotlight as Supreme Court poses new questions</a>

Prashant Bhushan rejects Supreme Court's offer to delay sentence but is given two to three days to reconsider statement

The telecom regulator <keyword id="6356988" type="DEFINITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="trai">TRAI</keyword> has termed as "misconceived" the plea moved in the <keyword id="6355014" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="delhi-high-court">Delhi High Court</keyword> by <keyword id="9461412" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="online-payment-platform-paytm">online payment platform Paytm</keyword> alleging that telecom operators are not blocking "<keyword id="6359049" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="phishing">phishing</keyword>" activities over various mobile networks. The Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) has made the submission in an affidavit filed in the high court in response to the petition by <keyword id="396834" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="One97-Communications-Ltd">One97 Communications Ltd</keyword>, which runs <keyword id="6357120" type="DEFINITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="paytm">Paytm</keyword>. On Wednesday, the matter was taken up by a bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan which said the affidavit was not on record. The court also adjourned the matter to July 14 to go through the various replies filed by the Centre, telecom companies like Airtel, Vodafone and Reliance Jio, and TRAI on the issue of phishing alleged by the Paytm. Phishing is a cyber crime where people are contacted by e-mail, phone calls or text messages by someone posing as a legitimate representative of a organisation to lure them to part with their sensitive data, including banking and credit card details and passwords. During the brief hearing held via video conferencing, senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for Paytm, said that everyone was in agreement that the Telecom Commercial Communications Customer Preferences Regulations (TCCCPR) 2018, which was notified by the TRAI to curb problem of unsolicited commercial communications, has to be strictly implemented in consumers interest. He said if a direction to strictly implement the regulations is issued then the matter can be disposed of. The Centre, in its reply filed through its standing counsel Anurag Ahluwalia, has said it has directed all TSPs to ensure sim card are not issued or activated without proper verification in order to address security related issues. It also said that it was closely monitoring the activation process and was also working on complaints received from individual subscribers or from industry with regard to unsolicited commercial communications (UCC) and was taking necessary action on a case to case basis. The telecom regulator in its reply has said that ordinary citizens/subscribers can complain under the TCCCPR with regard to UCCs. However, for business entities like Paytm, the procedure is different, it added. "The petitioners' (One97 and Paytm) major concerns are related to fraudulent activities which require coordination among multiple agencies. "TCCCPR, 2018 mainly deals with UCC," TRAI has said and added that the regulations "are not meant to deal with fraudulent messages". It said if any telecom user, who is also a customer of the Paytm, receives an UCC which he has not opted for as per the provisions of TCCCPR 2018, he is free to report the same to his TSP for resolution and to take necessary action against the defaulter. If a business entity faces a service problem with a TSP there is a system for lodging complaints which is distinct from TCCCPR, TRAI has said. With regard to Paytm's opposition to the graded penalty provision in TCCCPR, instead of instant disconnection, TRAI has said swift disconnection on the first violation "would cause disproportionate harm". It said such a step would not only take away the ability to send any message but such an action also disconnects access to the digital world using that number for other purposes. "Disconnection also breaks the link to reach out to the violator and find out the reasons and guide the violator to follow the norms. Graded penalty clubbed with provisions of putting usage caps, enables to discipline violators – especially violators who are unaware of such regulatory requirements," TRAI has said. TRAI has said that entities like Paytm were required to register themselves and their headers with the TSPs as per the TCCCPR 2018. However, Paytm got itself first registered with MTNL only in February this year, it said and added that despite that the company's earlier emails regarding suspected headers were forwarded to all TSPs for necessary action. Examples of some registered headers are -- Paytm, PYTM, PTM, IPAYTN, PYTKYC. TRAI has also said that there has been no failure in implementation of the "statutory and technological architecture" provided under TCCCPR. Paytm has claimed that millions of its customers have been defrauded by the phishing activities over the mobile networks and the failure of the telecom companies to prevent the same has "caused financial and reputational loss" to it for which it has sought damages of Rs 100 crore from them. Paytm has contended that the telecom majors are violating their obligations under the TCCCPR 2018. It has also sought direction to the Centre to ensure no sim card is sold without proper verification and to establish an inter-agency task force to coordinate action for limiting fraud taking place over telecom networks. HMP SKV HMP RKS RKS

You Searched For "dushyant dave" and got 12 results

Supreme Court likely to begin physical hearing in some courts from next week

IANS

Government to take action against defaulting EV firms in e-scooter fire accidents, says Nitin Gadkari

PTI

Crypto companies in Singapore to face more heat as it tightens rules and seeks more control

BI India Bureau

Supreme Court wields the ‘iron hand’ in holding Prashant Bhushan guilty for tweets critical of judiciary and chief justice

Prabhjote Gill

Supreme Court hastens to vaccinate staff and lawyers after 6 judges are affected by swine flu

BI India Bureau

‘You tell us whether government is going to put on hold farm laws or we will do this,’ Supreme Court tells Centre

Prabhjote Gill

SC asks J-K admin to explain detaining bar leader after expiry of order under PSA

PTI

Twitter's decision to 'proactively' remove Prashant Bhushan's tweets opposed by internet rights body

Prabhjote Gill

Judicial panel clears Chief Justice of India from sexual harassment charges

Rimin Dutt

COVID-19: SC asks states, UTs to provide safe transit to prisoners released during lockdown

PTI

Prashant Bhushan rejects Supreme Court's offer to delay sentence but is given two to three days to reconsider statement

Prabhjote Gill

India's telecom regulator snubs Paytm for blaming Airtel, Jio and others for rise in phishing

PTI

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides