Pritam Pal Singh

Expressing displeasure over the manner in which the matter is being delayed since May 2017 on the pretext of filing appeals, review, curative and now mercy petitons before different courts and authorities at different stages by each of the convicts, the bench said, “It is a strategic plan on how to prolong the matter.”

The court also issued directions to Google to preserve data as per law from Google Drive as early as possible.

The stretch was closed on December 15, 2019, after hundreds of women staged a sit-in at Shaheen Bagh to protest against the Citizenship Act and National Register of Citizens.

The court was hearing a petition filed by three JNU professors seeking to preserve CCTV footage, WhatsApp conversations and other evidence related to the violence that unleashed on the campus of the premier institution injuring over 30 students and teachers.

The HC issued notice to the Delhi government, police, WhatsApp, Google and Apple, to respond to the plea and listed it for hearing on Tuesday.

Justice Vibhu Bakhru ordered the presence of CBI director Rishi Kumar Shukla if the agency fails to complete the probe and file its final report in the case.

On January 9, 2018, the woman filed a complaint before the JNU’s internal complaints committee (ICC), alleging sexual harassment by two professors. After an enquiry, on August 2, the ICC submitted its report and recommended that her request for re-registration be considered.

Death warrant signed, Tihar prepares for execution; lawyers of convicts say filing curative pleas

Dismissing the appeal filed by the accused against the verdict on Monday, the Delhi High Court said it did not concur with the trial court’s conviction based on the victim’s sketches.

The incident took place on the night of March 30, 2012, when the labourers were sleeping on the ground floor. As a wall collapsed, they got trapped under the rubble.

In his lawsuit, Singh, a former JNU student alleged that the book published by Patna-based Asian Development Research Institute (ADRI), through its Member Secretary Shaibal Gupta, and endorsed by Kumar, is a plagiarised version of his research work.

The order came on an appeal by the Delhi government against the trial court’s July 2011 verdict, by which the accused, Amar Pal, was acquitted of charges on the ground that the victim appeared to be a “tutored witness” and it was not safe to rely on her testimony.

For close to 50 years, a legal battle has gone on between Rushdie’s family and that of Congressman Bhiku Ram Jain, after a deal to sell the house fell through.

A bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice C Hari Shankar said: “...we deem it appropriate to clarify that we have not opined against the use of Urdu words per se. Every language is entitled to command its own respect, and we are conscious of the richness of Urdu as a language.”

The apex court’s verdict came on the mother’s appeal against the Delhi High Court’s March 2010 verdict, which convicted her and sentenced her to life imprisonment for murder. The High Court had upheld a trial court’s December 2009 judgment.

Delhi government’s standing counsel Ramesh Singh, meanwhile, told the High Court that it was a policy decision and the court should not interfere with it.

The trial court had acquitted the two in February 2006 on the ground that there were contradictions and discrepancies in the deposition of the girl and her parents.

Besides Azad, 15 others — arrested under various IPC sections, including rioting — were sent to two-day judicial custody.

The Centre’s 2006 circular had directed that the children or other family members of those killed in the 1984 anti-Sikh riots be provided jobs on compassionate grounds.