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

The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> on Monday declined to entertain a plea by e-commerce giants <keyword id="18635" type="CITY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Amazon">Amazon</keyword> and <keyword id="6354742" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Flipkart">Flipkart</keyword>, saying they must face inquiry by Competition Commission of India (CCI) for anti-competitive practices. A bench headed by Chief Justice <keyword id="2797471" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="N-V-Ramana">N.V. Ramana</keyword> and comprising justices Vineet Saran and Surya Kant said: "Big organizations like you ( Flipkart and Amazon) should volunteer for inquiry... Inquiry has to be conducted." The bench declined to interfere with the orders of the <keyword id="6371973" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="karnataka-high-court">Karnataka High Court</keyword>, which refused to interfere with the preliminary enquiry ordered by the CCI into their alleged anti-competitive practices. The top court emphasized that the CCI inquiry must go on. However, the court accepted the request made by senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi for extending the time for the companies to reply to CCI. The e-commerce companies had moved the apex court challenging the Karnataka High Court order. The bench said it sees no reason to interfere in the high court order, and seeing that time granted is expiring on 9 August, "we extend it by 4 weeks". On July 23, the Karnataka High Court dismissed the plea by Amazon and Flipkart against a probe initiated by CCI for the alleged violation of competition law. A division bench comprising justices Satish Chandra Sharma and Natraj Rangaswamy passed the order on a batch of appeals moved by the e-commerce companies challenging a June 11 order passed by a single judge of the high court. The bench noted that by no stretch of imagination the inquiry can be quashed at this stage and the appellants shouldn't be afraid of investigation by CCI. The bench said: "In the considered opinion of the court, appeals filed by appellants are devoid of merit and deserved to be dismissed..." Amazon had moved Karnataka High Court against a CCI order which had called for a director general (DG) level investigation into allegations of anti-competitive conduct in the online sale of smartphones on its platform. The Delhi Vyapar Mahasangh (DVM), the informant before the CCI, had alleged predatory pricing, deep discounting, preferential seller listing, and exclusive partnerships, among others, against Amazon and Flipkart. SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/amazon-great-freedom-festival-get-last-day-deals-and-discounts/articleshow/85173017.cms">Amazon Great Freedom Festival 2021: Best last day tech deals and offers</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/gadgets/news/vivo-launched-its-y53s-with-64mp-rear-camera-in-india-on-monday/articleshow/85173234.cms">Vivo launched its Y53s with 64MP rear camera in India on Monday</a>

Supreme Court asks Amazon, Flipkart to volunteer for CCI probe

The <keyword id="6354977" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="supreme-court" source="Orion">Supreme Court</keyword> on Thursday said that it will pronounce its interim order next week on a batch of pleas seeking an independent probe into the <keyword id="6389936" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="pegasus" source="Orion">Pegasus</keyword> snooping matter. A bench headed by Chief Justice <keyword id="1534876" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="n-v-ramana" source="Orion">N V Ramana</keyword> said the order, which was to be pronounced earlier, will now be delivered next week. The top court on September 13 had reserved its order, saying it only wanted to know whether or not the Centre used the Pegasus spyware through illegal methods to allegedly snoop on citizens. The Centre had stoutly refused to file an affidavit citing national security on pleas seeking an independent probe into the snooping row. The pleas seeking an independent probe are related to reports of alleged snooping by government agencies on eminent citizens, politicians and scribes by using Israeli firm <keyword id="2501810" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="nso" source="Orion">NSO</keyword>'s spyware Pegasus. An international media consortium has reported that over 300 verified Indian mobile phone numbers were on the list of potential targets for surveillance using Pegasus spyware. SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/stock-market/news/indices-move-higher-on-positive-global-cues-bajaj-finserv-coal-india-tata-motors-lead-the-gains/articleshow/86448105.cms">Indices move higher on positive global cues; Bajaj Finserv, Coal India, Tata Motors lead the gains</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/oyo-may-file-for-1-billion-ipo-next-week/articleshow/86448073.cms">OYO may file for $1 billion IPO next week</a>

Supreme Court to pronounce order next week on pleas seeking independent probe into Pegasus snooping row

<ul><li>It said that the office of <keyword id="6363345" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="cji">CJI</keyword> will come under Right to Information act (<keyword id="6356198" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="RTI">RTI</keyword>). </li><li>This means that information can be sought by anybody by filing an application.</li><li>However, Justice Ramana who pronounced the verdict also said that RTI should not be allowed to be used as a tool of surveillance. </li></ul> The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> of India has made its <keyword id="42759" type="POSITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Chief-Justice">chief justice</keyword> accountable to the public. It said that the office of CJI will come under Right to Information (RTI) which means that information can be sought by anybody by filing an application. “RTI office of <keyword id="45053" type="POSITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Chief-Justice-of-India">Chief Justice of India</keyword> is a public authority under RTI. Judicial independence has to be kept in mind while dealing with transparency,” ruled SC in its order. However, Justice Ramana who pronounced the verdict also said that RTI should not be allowed to be used as a tool of surveillance. "Nobody wants to remain in the state of darkness or keep anybody in the state of darkness. The question is drawing a line. In the name of transparency, you can't destroy the institution," the SC bench said. 2010 or now? This order mirrors the Delhi High Court judgement which said that judicial independence was not the privilege of a judge but a responsibility. The case was filed by an RTI activist S C Agarwal who had engaged prominent lawyer Prashant Bhushan to file the case. The controversial case had triggered a debate between transparency and judicial freedom. Bhushan had famously questioned if judges inhabit a “different universe” and described their reluctance to part information as “disturbing”. This is the second important judgement that Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi has pronounced in the last week, <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/news/ayodhya-ram-mandir-case-supreme-court-verdict-top-highlights/articleshow/71979856.cms">after AYodhya case order on Saturday (November 9). </a>

Chief Justice of India will now come under RTI lens, says Supreme Court

<ul><li><keyword id="53964" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Soli-Sorabjee">Soli Sorabjee</keyword>, the <keyword id="2500151" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Former-Attorney-General-of-India">former Attorney General of India</keyword>, passed away on 30 April at the age of 91 due to complications from COVID-19.</li><li>The Padma Vibhushan awardee is most recognised for his work defending people’s freedom of expression as well as human rights. </li><li>Sorabjee is also one of the few well known names in the profession who have openly opposed lawyers that charge big bucks.</li></ul>Former <keyword id="458351" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Attorney-General-of-India">Attorney General of India</keyword>, Soli Sorabjee, passed away on Friday, at the age of 91 due to COVID-19 related issues. “He will be remembered as a legend who added strength to the pillars of democracy. I pay my deep respects to the departed soul. Condolences to the family, friends and fans,” said the Chief Justice of India NV Ramana. Sorabjee had a career that spanned across seven decades during which he served two terms as the Attorney General, once from 1989 to 1990 and again from 1998 to 2004. “Despite possessing a different political persuasion, Soli [Sorabjee] has steadfastly believed in Voltaire [sic] famous dictum that he would disagree violently with anyone but defend to death that person’s right to disagree with him,” said Abhishek Manu Singhvi, a senior Member of Parliament (MP) and senior advocate in the Supreme Court, in a <a href="https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/blogs/straight-candid/down-the-memory-lane-reminiscing-soli-sorabjee/?source=app&amp;frmapp=yes">Times of India</a> op-ed. <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="Work in the field of human rights and freedom of expression" comment="subhead" text="Work in the field of human rights and freedom of expression">Work in the field of human rights and freedom of expression</cmsannotation> Sorabjee is known for his work in the area of the protection of human rights and freedom of speech — an endeavour that eventually won him the Padma Vibhushan, India’s second-highest civilian honour, in March 2002. “If Soli was forced to choose amongst his many passions, I would guess freedom of speech and press would be his choice. His commitment to it has been unfailing and unflagging, never affected by the vicissitudes of contemporary ambiance or the burdens and exigencies of high office,” noted Singhvi. Sorabjee is also one of the few well known names in the profession who have openly opposed lawyers that charge big bucks. According to him, anyone charging ₹30 to ₹40 lakh is in the business of extortion. "If a man is willing to be robbed, will you be a thief," he <a href="https://www.shiksha.com/law/articles/5-famous-indian-lawyers-and-where-they-studied-blogId-8656">said.</a> The man has many a feather in his cap, including being the chairman of Berlin-based nonprofit organisation Transparency International and the convenor of the Minority Rights Group, in addition to being the <a href="https://www.un.org/press/en/1997/19971020.HRCN814.html">special rapporteur </a>to the United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHRC) since 1997. He also worked on the Citizen’s Justice Committee, which represented pro bono — without any legal fees — the victims of 1984 anti-Sikh riots. The champion for freedom of speech and expression also defended the press in many landmark Supreme Court cases revoking censorship orders and bans on publications. The most recent example of this was lawyer and activist <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">Prashant Bhushan’s case</a>. Before the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/supreme-court-tests-prashant-bhushans-resolve-with-a-1-fine-for-critical-tweets/articleshow/77846880.cms">₹1 verdict</a> came in, Sorabjee felt the apex institution overreacted over a couple of tweets. “The court may at most give a lecture to Prashant (Bhushan) now. Warn him, but not punish him… It is a rather delicate balance to keep,” he told <a href="https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/soli-sorabjee-interview-supreme-court-overreacted-in-prashant-bhushan-contempt-case/article32420327.ece?homepage=true">The Hindu. </a> Sorabjee was born on 9 March 1930 and after studying at St. Xavier’s College and the Government Law College in Mumbai, he enrolled at the Bar in 1953. Zora Mody, Sorabjee’s daughter, is also a lawyer and a published author. She wrote the book 10 Judgements that Changed India. Sorabjee also has three granddaughters — Anjali, Aarti and Aditi.

Former Attorney General of India Soli Sorabjee passes away at 91

Irked over truckload of bulky documents filed by parties in a batch of petitions arising out of the Amazon-Future Retail case (Reliance Industries acquisition deal with Future Retail), the Supreme Court Tuesday asked whether the purpose was just to drag on or harass the judges and sought a common small compilation of documents. A bench comprising Chief Justice N V Ramana and Justice A S Bopanna and Hima Kohli asked the counsel for parties to file small volume of documents so that the matter can be disposed of, and fixed the case for hearing on December 8. I am sorry to say to all of you. What is the fun in filing 22-23 volumes of records. How many documents both sides have filed repeatedly and is it the purpose of just dragging on or otherwise to harass the judges, said the CJI. It is completely unnecessary, senior advocate Harish Salve, appearing for the Future group, said and suggested that both sides can discuss and file a common document along with short written notes. There is a problem in locating the volume, the bench said, adding Give us some time. Do one thing. Can you make a small compilation of these documents which you are relying upon. Truckload of volume has been filed yesterday . Meanwhile, the bench allowed the IDBI trusteeship, which had moved the apex court seeking to de-freeze Future Retail shares pledged to it, withdrew its plea and said that it will go to the Delhi High Court with its plea. The pledged shares have been attached at the orders of the high court, senior advocate N K Kaul said, adding that since the apex court had barred the high court from proceeding with the case, the IDBI trusteeship has failed to access its shares. On November 11, the top court judge Justice Hima Kohli had offered to recuse herself from hearing the pleas, saying she and her family members have shares in Reliance Industries Ltd group firms, one of the interested parties to the litigation. We have no objection, said a battery of lawyers appearing for parties Amazon, Future Retail Limited (FRL) and Future Coupons Private Ltd (FCPL). The top court was hearing a fresh petition of Future Group against the Delhi High Court's recent order declining its plea for stay on an arbitration tribunal decision refusing to interfere with the Singapore International Arbitration Centre's (SIAC) Emergency Award (EA) which restrained it from going ahead with the Rs 24,731 crore merger deal with Reliance Retail. The bench was also hearing a counter plea by Amazon, seeking to restrain the regulators from approving the merger deal. It said the last order was passed with the consent of the parties that the regulatory authorities will not approve the merger deal without prior nod from the top court. The dispute over the merger deal has seen several rounds of litigation after SIAC passed the EA in favour of the US firm on October 25, 2020 staying the merger. On October 21 this year, a duly-constituted panel of arbitrators at SIAC reiterated the decision of the EA. Then on October 29, the Delhi High Court declined Future Group's plea for stay on the arbitration tribunal order refusing to interfere with the EA which restrained it from going ahead with the Rs 24,731 crore merger deal with Reliance Retail. The high court sought response from Amazon which had challenged the merger before the SIAC, and listed the appeals by FCPL and FRL for further hearing on January 4, 2022. FRL and FCPL moved the top court recently against the order with fresh pleas. Kishore Biyani and 15 others including FRL and FCPL have been embroiled in a series of litigations with Amazon, an investor in FCPL, over the deal with Reliance. Following the EA, subsequently, a three-member arbitral tribunal was constituted to decide the issues arising from the deal. On September 9, the apex court had stayed for four weeks all proceedings before the high court in relation to the implementation of the EA and also directed statutory authorities like National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Competition Commission of India (CCI) and Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi) not to pass any final order related to the merger deal in the meantime. Subsequently, the arbitration tribunal under the SIAC rejected on October 21 the FRL plea to lift the interim stay granted by its EA on October 25 last year, observing that "the Award was correctly granted". Amazon had dragged Future Group to arbitration at SIAC in October last year, arguing that FRL had violated their contract by entering into the deal with rival Reliance. The FRL and FCPL had moved the top court against the high court order of August 17 which said that it would implement the earlier order by its single-judge restraining FRL from going ahead with the deal in pursuance of the EA's award. The high court had said that in the absence of a stay, it would have to enforce the order passed by its single judge, Justice J R Midha, on March 18. On March 18, besides restraining FRL from going ahead with its deal with Reliance Retail, the court had imposed costs of Rs 20 lakh on the Future Group and others associated with it and ordered attachment of their properties. On August 6, the Supreme Court gave the verdict in favour of Amazon and held that EA award, restraining the Rs 24,731 crore FRL-Reliance Retail merger deal, is valid and enforceable under Indian arbitration laws. The apex court had also set aside the two orders of February 8 and March 22 of the division bench of the Delhi High Court order which had lifted the single-judge's orders staying the FRL-RRL merger. A bench headed by Justice R F Nariman, since retired, had dealt with the larger question and held that an award of an EA of a foreign country is enforceable under the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act. SEE ALSO <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/telecom/news/jio-is-slowing-down-in-the-race-to-500-million-subscribers/articleshow/87862415.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink">Jio is slowing down in the race to 500 million subscribers – a goal set by none other than Mukesh Ambani</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/nobroker-is-the-38th-indian-startup-to-be-valued-over-a-1-billion-in-2021/articleshow/87867289.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink">NoBroker is the 38th Indian startup to be valued over a billion dollars this year</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/telecom/news/vodafone-idea-hikes-tariffs-by-up-to-500-for-its-popular-plans/articleshow/87864183.cms" data-type="tilCustomLink">Vodafone Idea hikes tariffs by up to ₹500 for its popular plans</a>

Amazon vs Future — 'Why file voluminous records, to drag the case or harass judges?' asks Supreme Court

<ul><li>The national capital of India may be facing a <keyword id="6355017" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="water-shortage">water shortage</keyword> over the next three days.</li><li>The water shortage will not only impact the general population, but also hospitals, which are currently reeling from the surge in COVID-19 patients.</li><li>According to the Delhi Jal Board (DJB), Haryana is to blame for reducing the supply of water by 20% to 30% as well as making the water dirtier.</li><li>The DJB has filed a petition with the Supreme Court to address the issue. The court will hear the cases tomorrow on May 6.</li></ul>India’s national capital, New Delhi, has been under lockdown for nearly three weeks now, due to the surging number of COVID-19 cases. And a water shortage will only make things worse. The city is already facing a number of shortages as it is, from vaccines to oxygen to medical supplies. The administration in Delhi saw this coming, more than a month ago. The vice chairman of the Delhi Jal Board (DJB), Raghav Chaddha, claims he has even written multiple letters to the Haryana Chief Minister to address the issue, but no resolution has been offered. With no other option on the table, the DJB finally moved the Supreme Court to help the national capital in its moment of crisis. It told the apex court that there is a critical shortage in water being supplied from the neighbouring states of Punjab and Haryana. Not only will the people in the city suffer at large, the water shortage could hit hospitals as well -- the same hospitals which are currently understaffed and overrun with COVID-19 patients. <div type="ExtQuote" text="&quot;Due to depletion of levels at Wazirabad Pond and reduction in the release of raw water by Haryana into Yamuna, water production has been curtailed from the water treatment plants at Wazirabad, Chandrawal and Okhla.”" auname="Notification by the Delhi Jal Board on May 5"></div> The bench, headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) Nuthalapati Venkata Ramana, has decided to hear the matter tomorrow on May 6. <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="How bad is the water situation in Delhi?" comment="subhead" text="How bad is the water situation in Delhi?">How bad is the water situation in Delhi?</cmsannotation> The Yamuna River in Delhi gets around 250 million gallons of raw water from the Upper Ganga Canal. As of April, that flow was down to around which means only around 200 million gallons of water is coming in. As a result there was a shortage of water at the Sonia Vihar and Bhagirathi water treatment plants. To make matters worse, the water is dirtier than it used to be. The high ammonia concentration in the Yamuna has affected the productivity of the water treatment plants in Chandrawal and Wazirabad. These two plants are responsible for churning out an average of 228 million gallons of water a day for the people of Delhi. As per the latest estimates, levels at the Wazirabad water treatment plant have fallen by over 1% from the standard level of 674.5 feet to 667.2 feet of water. <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="Delhi saw the water shortage coming" comment="subhead" text="Delhi saw the water shortage coming">Delhi saw the water shortage coming</cmsannotation> This is not the first time that the DJB has had to go to the Supreme Court. On March 23, the DJB told the bench headed by CJI Sharad Arvind Bobde that Haryana has plans to cut 20% of its water to Delhi to repair work in one of its canals. Senior advocate AM Singhvi and advocate Gautam Narayan, appearing for the DJB, urged the court to order Haryana to postpone the work. They argued that a reduction in water supply during the peak summer months would adversely affect the national capital. At the time, the Supreme Court had ordered Haryana, as well as Punjab and the Bhakra Beas Management Board, to not make any changes to the supply of water to Delhi until April 6. The court then extended the water supply order to April 14. The following week, on April 19, the Supreme Court appointed a committee to conduct a local inspection with regard to the quality and quantity of water coming in from Haryana to Delhi. Disputes of water between Delhi and Haryana are not new. They happen every summer when the supply of water is limited and the national capital is dependent on its neighbour to ensure adequate supply. The only difference this time is the pandemic, which is putting the spotlight back on an already ongoing battle for survival. <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="This is the full list of areas in Delhi that are likely to be impacted by the water shortage between May 6 to May 8" comment="subhead" text="This is the full list of areas in Delhi that are likely to be impacted by the water shortage between May 6 to May 8">This is the full list of areas in Delhi that are likely to be impacted by the water shortage between May 6 to May 8</cmsannotation> <ol><li>Civil Lines</li><li>Hindu Rao Hospital and adjoining areas</li><li>Kamla Nagar</li><li>Shakti Nagar and adjoining areas</li><li>Karol Bagh</li><li>Pahar Ganj and NDMC areas</li><li>Old and New Rajinder Nagar</li><li>East and West Patel Nagar</li><li>Baljeet Nagar</li><li>Prem Nagar</li><li>Inderpuri and adjoining areas</li><li>Kalkaji</li><li>Govindpuri</li><li>Tughlakabad</li><li>Sangam Vihar</li><li>Ambedkar Nagar</li><li>Prahladpur and adjoining areas</li><li>Ramleela Ground</li><li>Delhi Gate</li><li>Subhash Park</li><li>Model Town</li><li>Gulabi Bagh</li><li>Punjabi Bagh</li><li>Jahangirpuri</li><li>Moolchand</li><li>South Extension</li><li>Greater Kailash</li><li>Burari and adjoining areas</li><li>Parts of the Cantonment areas, South Delhi, Central Delhi, West Delhi and North Delhi</li></ol>SEE ALSO:<a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/stock-market/news/banks-respond-positively-to-indian-central-banks-covid-stimulus-package-check-out-the-list-of-top-gainers/articleshow/82400850.cms">Banks respond positively to Indian central bank’s COVID stimulus package – check out the list of top gainers</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/science/space/news/chinse-space-station-rocket-to-hit-earth-being-tracked-by-the-pentagon-us-space-command/articleshow/82402617.cms">The Pentagon has its eye on the out-of-control Chinese rocket that is expected to crash into Earth — but it’s not anything to lose sleep over</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/private-ambulances-in-gurgaon-are-on-strike-amid-the-surging-cases-of-covid-19/articleshow/82404211.cms">COVID-19 patients are the ones paying the price amid the tussle over rates between the government and ambulance operators in Gurgaon</a>

Water shortage might be on the way to worsen Delhi's COVID-19 crisis

<ul class="summary-list"><li>The Indian government placed an internet shutdown on the disputed state of Kashmir in August last year, cutting Kashmiris off from the outside world.</li><li>India's supreme court ruled the indefinite shutdown unlawful on Friday, and ordered the government to review the restrictions on Kashmir within the next week.</li><li>Significantly the court also ordered the government to make public all orders on internet shutdown, which India frequently deploys.</li><li><a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/?hprecirc-bullet">Visit Business Insider's homepage for more stories.</a></li></ul>After more than 150 days without internet, the Indian state of Kashmir might have just got a reprieve.India's supreme court ruled on Friday that the indefinite government-imposed internet shutdown in the state is unconstitutional."Freedom of Internet access is a fundamental right," said Supreme Court justice N. V. Ramana. The court has given the Indian government one week to review the restrictions imposed on Kashmir.The state of Jammu and Kashmir has long been a disputed territory between India and neighbouring Pakistan. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi's administration implemented the internet shutdown in August last year, justifying it by saying it was to calm unrest in the region.At 159 days, it is the longest internet blackout ever imposed in a democracy. While the blackout was in force <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/kashmir-blackout-locals-dont-know-india-revoked-autonomy-report-2019-8?r=US&amp;IR=T">India also stripped Kashmir of its semi-autonomous status</a>.The court also ordered the Indian government to make public all orders on internet shutdowns, which it frequently deploys. Since 2016 India has experienced 353 internet shutdowns, <a href="https://internetshutdowns.in/">according to Internet Shutdowns</a>, a site run by India-based advocacy group the Software Law and Freedom Centre.Human Rights Watch's South Asia director Meenakshi Ganguly told Business Insider this sets an important precedent."Indian authorities often shut down internet access, but the Supreme Court has now said that any restrictions brought in to maintain public order should not become a tool to repress legitimate right to speech and expression."The Supreme Court has upheld international standards that any restrictions of rights must be proportional and based on material facts," said Ganguly.Ganguly pointed out that the court order doesn't immediately lift the shutdown, and said the government may try to delay it using "security justifications," but she still expects it will lead to the end of the shutdown.

You Searched For "justice of india nv ramana" and got 7 results

Supreme Court asks Amazon, Flipkart to volunteer for CCI probe

IANS

Supreme Court to pronounce order next week on pleas seeking independent probe into Pegasus snooping row

PTI

Chief Justice of India will now come under RTI lens, says Supreme Court

Preeti

Katya

Former Attorney General of India Soli Sorabjee passes away at 91

BI India Bureau

Amazon vs Future — 'Why file voluminous records, to drag the case or harass judges?' asks Supreme Court

PTI

Water shortage might be on the way to worsen Delhi's COVID-19 crisis

Prabhjote Gill

India's top court has declared the record-breaking 159-day-long Kashmir internet blackout illegal

Isobel Asher Hamilton

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides