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

During hearing a 2009 contempt case against advocate <keyword id="6368850" type="DEFINITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="prashant-bhushan">Prashant Bhushan</keyword>, the <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> on Tuesday observed that it is not only question of punishment but also faith in the institution that required detailed hearing and referred the matter to an appropriate bench. The contempt case is in connection with Bhushan's comments on the judiciary during an interview to the Tehelka magazine in 2009. A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra told senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, representing Bhushan, that he must ponder that people come to court for relief, and when that faith is shaken then there is a problem. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for journalist Tarun Tejpal, contended before the bench that people come to court for justice and relief. "We will come and go but the institution exists forever. We must protect the integrity of the institution," submitted Sibal. The bench said let the matter be listed on September 10 before an appropriate bench by the Chief Justice. "I am short of time. I am demitting office," Justice Mishra observed, who is scheduled to retire on September 2, citing the matter requires detailed hearing. During the hearing, the top court observed that in this case in addition to the Attorney General, the assistance of some amicus is also required. Dhavan asked the bench to issue notice to the Attorney General. "Let us leave this to an appropriate bench," Justice Mishra noted. Dhavan argued that the important question is how much of the court's free speech jurisprudence could be read into suo moto contempt powers? SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/telecom/news/airtel-wants-to-increase-data-prices-to-100-per-gb-sunil-mittal-asks-subscribers-to-prepare-to-pay-a-lot-more/articleshow/77734318.cms">Airtel wants to increase data prices to ₹100 per GB, Sunil Mittal asks subscribers to ‘prepare to pay a lot more’</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/startups/news/india-startup-founders-are-opting-for-money-in-the-bank-instead-of-high-valuations-as-they-look-to-survive-this-pandemic/articleshow/77733965.cms">India's startup founders are opting for money in the bank instead of high valuations as they look to survive this pandemic</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/telecom/news/without-huawei-and-zte-in-india-airtel-and-vodafone-ideas-battle-against-jio-to-become-tougher/articleshow/77734889.cms">Without Huawei and ZTE in India, Airtel and Vodafone-Idea's battle against Jio to become tougher</a>

Supreme Court refers Prashant Bhushan's 2009 contempt case to another bench

The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> on Thursday asked Attorney General K.K. Venugopal to assist the court in the <keyword id="9820120" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="2009-contempt-case">2009 contempt case</keyword> against Advocate <keyword id="6368850" type="DEFINITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="prashant-bhushan">Prashant Bhushan</keyword> for his remarks in the Tehelka magazine. A bench comprising Justices A.M. Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and Sanjiv Khanna directed that the case record of the 2009 contempt case should be sent to AG. Senior advocate <keyword id="377410" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Rajeev-Dhavan">Rajeev Dhavan</keyword>, representing Bhushan, submitted before the bench that in the previous hearing the AG had shown inclination to assist the court in the matter, and thus he should be impleaded as an amicus curiae. The bench replied that the AG would be impleaded in the case in accordance with the Rule 10 of the Supreme Court Rules, and the decision to appoint him as an amicus-curiae in the matter will be taken later. Dhavan contended before the bench there are more questions of law, which should be framed in the case, as 10 questions have already been framed. He added that the court wanted to add three more. After a brief hearing on the matter, the bench said it will take up the case in the week commencing from October 12. On August 25, <keyword id="1014396" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Justice-Arun-Mishra">Justice Arun Mishra</keyword> had directed that the case be placed before another bench, as he was days away from demitting office. The Supreme Court had observed that it is not a question of punishment only, it is a question of faith in the institution. A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra had told Dhavan that he must ponder that people come to court for relief, and when that faith is shaken then there is a problem. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for journalist Tarun Tejpal, contended before the bench that people come to court for justice and relief. "We will come and go but the institution exists forever. We must protect the integrity of the institution," Sibal had submitted. The bench had then said the matter to be listed on September 10 before an appropriate bench by the Chief Justice. "I am short of time. I am demitting office," Justice Mishra had observed, who retired on September 2. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/finance/banks/news/supreme-court-inclined-to-excuse-moratorium-interest-on-interest-as-it-gives-the-government-another-two-weeks-to-file-detailed-affidavit/articleshow/78033878.cms">Supreme Court ‘inclined’ to excuse moratorium interest on interest as it gives the government another two weeks to file detailed affidavit</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/supreme-court-tests-prashant-bhushans-resolve-with-a-1-fine-for-critical-tweets/articleshow/77846880.cms">Supreme Court tests Prashant Bhushan's resolve with a ₹1 fine for 'critical' tweets</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/supreme-court-refers-prashant-bhushans-2009-contempt-to-another-bench/articleshow/77736957.cms">Supreme Court refers Prashant Bhushan's 2009 contempt case to another bench</a>

Supreme Court ropes in Attorney General to help in 2009 contempt case against Bhushan

The <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> on Monday framed a larger question during the hearing of the 2009 contempt case against advocate <keyword id="6368850" type="DEFINITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="prashant-bhushan">Prashant Bhushan</keyword>. It asked when could corruption allegations against the judges be made public? A bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra, B R Gavai and Krishna Murari posed the following questions -under what circumstances, public statements in connection with corruption of judges can be made, and what procedure should be adopted if such statements of corruption were made in public against sitting as well as retired judges? In 2009, Bhushan, in an interview to Tehleka magazine alleged that at least half of the last 16 Chief Justices of India were corrupt. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing journalist Tarun Tejpal, sought a quietus to the case. Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, representing Prashant Bhushan, also agreed on closure on the case, but argued that one cannot go to the press, is a bad decision and needs a review. The bench noted that putting a quietus is not the issue and cited the questions. "We want to hear, because if the questions are left then it will not be better for later on", noted the bench. Dhavan contended that questions are meaningful, and they should be considered by a larger bench. Justice Mishra replied that this aspect would also be considered. The top court adjourned the matter till August 24. On August 10, the Supreme Court had said that it will hear in detail whether any comment on corruption against judges tantamounts to contempt of court or not, adding that it will hear the 2009 contempt case against lawyer Prashant Bhushan. A bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra had said that it has decided to hear whether the remarks made by Bhushan against the higher judiciary in a Tehelka magazine interview is "per se contempt". "Before reaching to any finding whether the statement made as to 'Corruption' would per se amount to Contempt of Court, the matter is required to be heard", said the bench. Earlier, the apex court had said it would go on to hear the case if "we do not accept the explanation/apology of Bhushan". On August 4, the Supreme Court had said it had not received the apology submitted by Bhushan and reserved its order in the 2009 contempt case against him. 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/supreme-court-to-hear-2009-comtempt-case-against-lawyer-prashant-bhushan/articleshow/77458477.cms">Supreme Court to hear 2009 contempt case against lawyer Prashant Bhushan</a>

2009 Prashant Bhushan contempt case back in the spotlight as Supreme Court poses new questions

<ul><li>The top court scheduled the matter for further hearing on August 17.</li><li>Last week, the apex court had said it would go on to hear the case if "we do not accept the explanation/apology of Bhushan".</li><li>On August 4, the Supreme Court had said it had not received the apology submitted by Bhushan and reserved its order in the 2009 contempt case against him.</li></ul>The Supreme Court on Monday said that it will hear in detail whether any comment on corruption against judges tantamount to contempt of court or not, adding that it will hear the 2009 contempt case against <keyword id="1760256" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="lawyer-Prashant-Bhushan">lawyer Prashant Bhushan</keyword>. A bench headed by <keyword id="1014396" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Justice-Arun-Mishra">Justice Arun Mishra</keyword> said that it has decided to hear whether the remarks made by <keyword id="9730773" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="senior-advocate-prashant-bhushan">Senior Advocate Prashant Bhushan</keyword> against the higher judiciary in a Tehelka magazine interview is "per se contempt". The top court scheduled the matter for further hearing on August 17. Last week, the apex court had said it would go on to hear the case if "we do not accept the explanation/apology of Bhushan". On August 4, the Supreme Court had said it had not received the apology submitted by Bhushan and reserved its order in the 2009 contempt case against him. A bench comprising Justices Arun Mishra, BR Gavai and <keyword id="333383" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Krishna-Murari">Krishna Murari</keyword> had said: "We have heard the counsel for the parties at some length. Explanation/apology submitted by Prashant Bhushan/Respondent No. 1 and Tarun Tejpal/Respondent No. 2 have not been received so far." The bench added: "In case we do not accept the explanation/apology, we will hear the matter. We reserve the order." In an earlier hearing, taking up the 2009 contempt of court case, the apex court observed that there is a "thin line between free speech and contempt", adding that the issue now is how to save the system's grace and bring the matter to an end as well. The bench asked Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan, representing Bhushan, to suggest ways to resolve this matter. Justice Mishra had told Dhavan: "Can you suggest some way to avoid this rigmarole? You can resolve it." In response, Dhavan had said that Bhushan had already provided an explanation on the matter. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/these-are-the-tabletop-airports-in-india-two-of-them-have-seen-major-plane-crashes-in-last-10-years/articleshow/77427972.cms">These are the tabletop airports in India – two of them have seen major plane crashes in last 10 years</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> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/news/mukesh-ambani-is-now-the-worlds-fourth-richest-person-after-he-beat-louis-vuitton-owner-bernard-arnault/articleshow/77431776.cms">Mukesh Ambani is now the world’s fourth-richest person after he beat Louis Vuitton owner Bernard Arnault</a>

Supreme Court to hear 2009 contempt case against lawyer Prashant Bhushan

Activist-lawyer <keyword id="6368850" type="DEFINITION" weightage="20" keywordseo="prashant-bhushan">Prashant Bhushan</keyword> Tuesday urged the <keyword id="6354977" type="ORGANIZATION" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court">Supreme Court</keyword> to give a "statesman like message" by recalling the verdict convicting him for the contempt of the court for his two tweets against the judiciary. Attorney General K K Venugopal also asked the bench headed by Justice Arun Mishra to forgive Bhushan, who has been refusing to tender unconditional apology for the tweets. He said Bhushan should "withdraw all statements and express regret". The bench, which on August 20 had granted time till Monday to Bhushan to reconsider his "defiant statement" and tender "unconditional apology" for the contemptuous tweets, concluded hearing on the quantum of punishment to be awarded to the activist lawyer. "Though Attorney General suggested reprimand but that will be extreme. Don't make Prashant Bhushan a martyr. Don't do it. He has not committed murder or theft," senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for Bhushan, submitted before the bench, also comprising Justices B R Gavai and Krishna Murari. Referring to the supplementary statement tendered by Bhushan, his lawyer said that not only this case be closed but even the controversy has come to an end and "there should be a statesman like message" from the top court. "I make two suggestions. The convicting judgement should be recalled and no sentence should be imposed. I am making a statement on my client's behalf," Dhavan said. Referring to Bhushan's statements and his refusal to apologise, the bench asked Venugopal that mistakes were committed by all but they needed to be accepted and said that here Bhushan was not willing to accept that. "We have to be respectful to each other and tolerant. We are not separate from you (lawyers). We have also come from the bar. We are open to criticism but we cannot go in public," the bench said during the hearing. Justice Mishra, who is demitting office on September 2, said that judges cannot go to the press to speak their mind. "We are not carrying prejudice against anyone. Don't think we are not tolerating criticism. There are several contempt petitions pending but tell us has he been punished ever. It is painful to see such things happening at the time when I am demitting office," Justice Mishra said. The court, which granted 30 minutes to Bhushan to 'think over' his stand of not expressing regret over his tweets, later sought views of Dhavan on the punishment to be awarded to Bhushan in the contempt case. Dhavan said he did not support Venugopal's view that Bhushan be reprimanded as it will be an extreme punishment and moreover, he has not committed any murder or theft and any such punishment will make him "a martyr". Taking note of Bhushan's refusal to apologise, the bench commented as to what is wrong in apologising, is this word so bad. Venugopal said that judges were the third party in this case against whom the alleged statements have been made and the court has not heard them. "Why are such allegations being made in the first place," the bench asked. Judges cannot defend themselves, the bench observed and said that it is the Attorney General who will have to protect the system. "Reprimanding like 'don't do it again will not be correct," Venugopal said. Earlier in the day, the court granted 30 minutes to Bhushan to reconsider his stand after the Attorney General sought forgiveness for the activist-lawyer. He had refused to offer an apology to the Supreme Court for his two tweets against the judiciary, saying what he expressed represented his bona fide belief which he continued to hold. "Bhushan says the Supreme Court has collapsed, is it not objectionable," asked the bench. The court can speak through orders only and even in his affidavit, Bhushan has made disparaging remarks against the judiciary, the bench said. The court should warn him and take a compassionate view, Venugopal told the bench. When Bhushan does not think he did anything wrong then what is the point of giving him advice to not repeating it, the bench said. "A person should realize his mistake, we gave Bhushan time but he says he will not apologize," it said. The apex court on August 14 had held Bhushan guilty of criminal contempt for his two derogatory tweets against the judiciary saying they cannot be said to be a fair criticism of the functioning of the judiciary made in the public interest. He faces simple imprisonment of up to six months or with a fine of up to Rs 2,000 or with both as punishment. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/supreme-court-gives-prashant-bhushan-final-30-minutes-to-reconsider-giving-apology/articleshow/77739151.cms">Supreme Court gives Prashant Bhushan final 30 minutes to reconsider giving apology</a> <a href="http://businessinsider.in/india/news/supreme-court-refers-prashant-bhushans-2009-contempt-to-another-bench/articleshow/77736957.cms">Supreme Court refers Prashant Bhushan's 2009 contempt case to another bench</a>

Prashant Bhushan asks Supreme Court to recall verdict as he faces imprisonment of up to six months or with a fine of up to ₹ 2,000

<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

Women dominated this year's <keyword id="6391019" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="Padma-awards">Padma awards</keyword> for sports with tennis star Sania Mirza and ace shuttler <keyword id="30618" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Saina-Nehwal">Saina Nehwal</keyword> getting the nod for the Padma Bhushan, while archer <keyword id="86231" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Deepika-Kumari">Deepika Kumari</keyword> was chosen for the Padma Shri here today. 

	All three were in sublime touch last year and brought the country laurels in their respective sports. 
 Sania enjoyed the most sensational run, clinching nine titles -- including two Grand Slams last year with Swiss great Martina Hingis. The exceptional performance propelled her to the top of the <keyword id="935171" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="WTA-doubles-rankings">WTA doubles rankings</keyword>. 

	The 29-year-old is currently competing in the Australian Open in Melbourne, where she has reached the women's doubles quarterfinals with Hingis. 
 Saina has also been in spectacular touch, winning silver medals at the All England and World Badminton Championship last year besides clinching the India Open Super Series and <keyword id="2039194" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="Syed-Modi-Grand-Prix-Gold">Syed Modi Grand Prix Gold</keyword>. 

	Deepika, on the other hand, won a silver at the Archery World Cup Final besides bronze medals at the World Cup Stage II and the Asian Team Championships. 
 

	Saina, who is in the country to compete in this week's Syed Modi Grand Prix Gold Tournament, said the honour has left her surprised. Interestingly, the 25-year-old had expressed her displeasure at being ignored for the award last year. 
 
 

	"It is a great honour and I want to thank the Ministry for giving me the award. I am very happy with the way the last year has gone, I have been performing well. I reached World No.1 last year and now I am World No.2. I am sure this award will give me more motivation to do well further this year," Saina said. 
 

	"It came as a complete surprise to me. I had no clue. I did not expect at all. There was no news of it at all. When I think that I am just 25 and I have received this award, it makes me feel great. But it is still a long way to go." 
 

	Saina was left disappointed after the Sports Ministry decided to reject her application for the award in January last year, citing norms. 
 

	The ministry had picked two-time Olympic-medallist wrestler Sushil Kumar for the honour last year. 
 

	Saina was bestowed the Khel Ratna and Padma Shri in 2010 and also received the Arjuna Award in 2009. 
 

	The 21-year-old Deepika, meanwhile, had also won the team silver along with Laxmirani Majhi and Rimil Buriuly in the World Championships. 
	 
	
		Superstar Rajinikanth, founder of the Reliance empire late Dhirubhai Ambani, Art of Living founder Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and media baron Ramoji Rao have been chosen for Padma Vibhushan, country's second highest civilian award, this year. 
	 
	
		Former Jammu and Kashmir Governor Jagmohan, former DRDO chief V K Aatre, cancer specialist and chairperson of Adyar Cancer Institute Dr V Shanta and eminent Bharatnatyam and Kuchipudi dancer Yamini Krishnamurthi and classical vocalist Girija Devi and Indian-American economist Avinash Dixit have also been named for Padma Vibhushan on the occasion of this year's Republic Day celebrations. 
	 
	
		Noted actor Anupam Kher, singer Udit Narayan, former CAG Vinod Rai, chairperson of media group Bennett, Coleman &amp; Co. Indu Jain, sports star Sania Mirza and Saina Nehwal, spiritual leaders late Swami Dayanand Saraswati, Swami Tejomayananda and former US Ambassador to India Robert Blackwill are among the 19 eminent people chosen for Padma Bhushan. 
	 
	
		Industrialist Pallonji Shapoorji Mistry, Maruti Suzuki chairman R C Bhargava and eminent architect Hafeez Contractor also figure in the list of Padma Bhushan awardees. 
	 
	
		Senior lawyer Ujjwal Nikam, who was the prosecution counsel in the Mumbai terror attack case, actors Ajay Devgn and Priyanka Chopra get Padma Shri.
	
		 
		Renowned sculptor Ram V Sutar, Manipuri theatre personality Heisnam Kanhailal, Hindi and Telugu writer Yarlagadda Lakshmi Prasad, Sanskrit scholar N S Ramanuja Tatacharya, Punjabi journalist Barjinder Singh Hamdard, gastroenterologist D Nageshwar Reddy and scientist A V Rama Rao have been chosen for Padma Bhushan. 
	 
	
		Actor the late Saeed Jaffrey, CEO of MasterCard Ajaypal Singh Banga, archer Deepika Kumari, Bharatanatyam dancer Prathibha Prahlad, Gujarati folk musician Bhikhudan Gadhvi, Goa's musician Tulsidas Borkar and scientist Onkar Nath Srivastava were among those who were named for Padma Shri awards.

Padma Bhushan for Sania Mirza, Saina Nehwal

<ul><li>A Hyderabad civil court passed the stay order on a petition filed by Raju, who was released on bail in 2018. He sought orders to restrain <keyword id="128682" type="COMPANY" weightage="20" keywordseo="Netflix">Netflix</keyword> from releasing the web series on the ground that it would invade his privacy in an unlawful manner.</li><li>Raju also claimed that the narrative contained half-truths and palpably designed to bring down his reputation.</li><li>Netflix released the trailer of the web series which is about Vijay Mallya, Nirav Modi, Subrata Roy and <keyword id="41263" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="Ramalinga-Raju">Ramalinga Raju</keyword>.</li></ul> A court in Hyderabad on Tuesday restrained Netflix from releasing web series "<keyword id="9827211" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="bad-boy-billionaires">Bad Boy Billionaires</keyword>: India" on the life story of Satyam Computer Services founder B. Ramalinga Raju who was convicted in Satyam scam and three others. A Hyderabad civil court passed the stay order on a petition filed by Raju, who was released on bail in 2018. He sought orders to restrain Netflix from releasing the web series on the ground that it would invade his privacy in an unlawful manner. Raju also claimed that the narrative contained half-truths and palpably designed to bring down his reputation. Netflix has already released the trailer of the web series which is about Vijay Mallya, Nirav Modi, Subrata Roy and Ramalinga Raju. "What would you do to make it to the top? To build an empire? To maintain an image? Bad Boy Billionaires answers just that. Dive into the stories of India's most infamous billionaires - Vijay Mallya, Nirav Modi, Subrata Roy, and Byrraju Ramalinga Raju as they plan, plot and maneuver through their rises and falls. Watch as insiders and experts discuss what made these men genius and, in some cases, the greatest conmen," reads the description by Netflix. A court in Bihar had last week restrained Netflix from using Subrata Roy's name in the web series. The over Rs 7,000 crore Satyam scam came to light on January 7, 2009 when Ramalinga Raju confessed that the company's account books and profits were inflated over many years to the tune of several crores of rupees. Police arrested him two days later on a complaint by some shareholders. The CBI filed three charge sheets against Raju and the other accused, charging them with cheating, criminal conspiracy, forgery, falsification of accounts and breach of trust. A special CBI court in April 2015 had sentenced him, his two brothers and seven others to seven years in prison in the case, said to be India's biggest corporate fraud. However, a month later, the metropolitan sessions court suspended their sentence and granted them bail. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/icj-raises-concern-on-sc-decision-in-bhushan-case-says-its-inconsistent-with-international-standards/articleshow/77885669.cms">ICJ raises concern on SC decision in Bhushan case — says it’s inconsistent with international standards</a>

Hyderabad Court stays release of Netflix's Bad Boy Billionaires: India following Ramalinga Raju's objections

New Delhi, Mar 13 () NCLAT Chairperson Justice Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, who handled several big-ticket insolvency cases like Essar Steel during his tenure at the appellate quasi-judicial body, retired on Friday. Justice Mukhopadhaya, who turns 70 on March 15, was the first chairperson of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) which was established on June 1, 2016. An NCLAT chairperson is appointed for five years and can hold office till the age of 70 years. He delivered several landmark judgements during his tenure of nearly four years. He supervised and handled several major big ticket insolvency cases that includes Essar Steel, Bhushan Power &amp; Steel, Bhushan Steel, Jaypee Infratech, ElectroSteel Steel, Binani Cement, Reliance Communications.Besides, Justice Mukhopadhaya also delivered several judgements and laid precedents for several NCLT orders and the newly-enacted Insolvency &amp; Bankruptcy Code, 2016.He would also be known for his order reinstating the ousted Tata Sons head Cyrus Mistry as it shocked the entire business world.Besides, he also proposed resolution of the IL&amp;FS group which has an outstanding debt of over Rs 94,000 crore, on the pattern of IBC."I have enjoyed every moment here from the day one," he said while addressing a function organised by the NCLAT bar here on Friday.He also said that the Chennai bench of the NCLAT would be functional from Friday."I am happy that all courts are functioning with speed. For me, speed was essence for any resolution process," he said. Prior to this, Justice Mukhopadhaya was a judge of the Supreme Court of India from September 13, 2011, to March 14, 2015.Justice Mukhopadhaya had started practice at Patna and Ranchi benches of the High Court in 1979 and was designated as senior advocate in February 1993.He was appointed as a permanent Judge of the High Court of Patna in November 1994 and after that served as judge of Jharkhand High Court after its creation. He also served as Judge of the Madras High Court, where he also functioned as the Acting Chief Justice for about five months.Thereafter from December 2009 to September 2011 he was the Chief Justice of the High Court of Gujarat and then was elevated to the apex court from where he retired on March 14, 2015.NCLAT constituted under Section 410 of the Companies Act, 2013 for hearing appeals against the orders of National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT). It is also appellate tribunal for hearing appeals against the orders passed by NCLT under the IBC and Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India.It is also the Appellate Tribunal to hear and dispose of appeals against any direction issued or decision made or order passed by the Competition Commission of India (CCI).The NCLAT Chairperson is appointed for a term of five years and can hold office till the age of 70 years. KRH MRMR

NCLAT Chairman Justice S J Mukhopadhaya retires

Every year, India’s bad loan problem scales new heights. The recently concluded financial year was no different. The country’s <keyword id="6368751" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="20" keywordseo="banks">banks</keyword> wrote off ₹1.44 trillion (US $21.2 billion) worth of unrecoverable loans in the year that ended March 2018, according to figures from The Indian Express. To put things into perspective, this is <a href="https://data.worldbank.org/country/maldives">five times the GDP</a> of Maldives. The figure represents a significant jump from 2016-17 and 2015-16, when the banking sector wrote off ₹890.5 billion and ₹712.5 billion worth of loans, respectively. Unfortunately, most of this money belongs to taxpayers. Since 2009, India’s banks have completed a staggering ₹4.8 trillion worth of <keyword id="2838701" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="write-offs">write-offs</keyword>, more than 80% of which were written off by public sector banks. India’s state-owned banks wrote off ₹1.2 trillion the loans in 2017-18, led by the State Bank of India and Indian Overseas Bank, and their bottom-line results reflected this. The losses recorded by state-owned banks last year totalled <a href="https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/markets/stocks/news/total-net-loss-of-public-sector-banks-topped-rs-87000-crore-in-fy18/articleshow/64527973.cms">₹874 billion</a>. Concurrently, the overall amount of non-performing loans in the Indian banking sector rose by over 25% to ₹10.3 trillion as the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) became stricter about the classification of <keyword id="142154" type="PERSON" weightage="20" keywordseo="bad-loans">bad loans</keyword> and India’s new bankruptcy regime took flight. A matter of accounting The first step to tackling a problem is the recognition of it. Once a loan is written off, it no longer counts as a non-performing asset, so this can also be viewed as a reduction in bad loans, from an accounting standpoint. These figures indicate that more loans are being defaulted on, but also that banks are becoming more realistic about clearing their balance sheets. Rather than holding on to the hope that a loan can be recovered, it makes sense to write it off and avail the benefit of a lower taxable income. By the looks of it, however, the bad loan problem will continue to get worse in the near term before getting better. The RBI will continue to push banks to recognise stressed accounts as non-performing loans without any delays and set provisions aside for them accordingly. This will cause short-term pain but it will be a good move in the long term. In a positive sign, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (ISBC) has proved to be a minor success since it came into being last year. Out of the 12 cases slated for resolution under the code, only one - Bhushan Steel - has been resolved so far. However, a few more are expected to be resolved this year, which will ease the burden on India’s banks.

You Searched For "prashan bhushan 2009 case" and got 10 results

Supreme Court refers Prashant Bhushan's 2009 contempt case to another bench

IANS

Supreme Court ropes in Attorney General to help in 2009 contempt case against Bhushan

IANS

2009 Prashant Bhushan contempt case back in the spotlight as Supreme Court poses new questions

IANS

Supreme Court to hear 2009 contempt case against lawyer Prashant Bhushan

IANS

Prashant Bhushan asks Supreme Court to recall verdict as he faces imprisonment of up to six months or with a fine of up to ₹ 2,000

PTI

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

Prabhjote Gill

Padma Bhushan for Sania Mirza, Saina Nehwal

BI India Bureau

Hyderabad Court stays release of Netflix's Bad Boy Billionaires: India following Ramalinga Raju's objections

IANS

NCLAT Chairman Justice S J Mukhopadhaya retires

PTI

India's bad loan problem continues to break records

Dilsher Dhillon

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides