#delhi_high_court

Naga Chaitanya Files Legal Action Against Misuse of Identity and Defamatory AI Content Actor Naga Chaitanya has initiated legal proceedings in the Delhi High Court to address the alleged misuse of his personal identity and the proliferation of defamatory AI-generated content online. His legal team argued that unauthorized use of his name, image, and voice through deepfake technology and AI tools has led to the circulation of explicit material, commercial exploitation, and reputational harm. The case highlights concerns over the boundaries of public scrutiny for celebrities and the legal protections available for personality rights. During the hearing, Senior Advocate Vaibhav Gaggar, representing Chaitanya, presented evidence to the court detailing the extent of the alleged violations. The legal team submitted that several websites were exploiting Chaitanya’s name in conjunction with explicit search terms to attract traffic and distribute objectionable content. Unauthorised merchandise listings featuring his likeness were also showcased, with the court informed of online stores selling products bearing his image without consent. The lawsuit specifically targets the use of deepfake technology, voice-cloning software, and AI-based editing tools to create and disseminate false audiovisual material for financial gain. Chaitanya’s counsel emphasized that such practices have severely impacted his reputation, privacy, and public standing. The legal team also drew attention to defamatory YouTube uploads targeting the actor, noting that while some links had been removed, others linked to media coverage remained accessible. Justice Jyoti Singh, presiding over the case, acknowledged the heightened public scrutiny faced by celebrities but underscored the existence of clear boundaries.#delhi_high_court #naga_chaitanya #vaibhav_gaggar #justice_jyoti_singh #nagarjuna

Delhi High Court Grants Naga Chaitanya Interim Relief in Personality Rights Case The Delhi High Court has taken decisive action to safeguard the personality rights of Telugu actor Naga Chaitanya, issuing summons against unnamed defendants and indicating it will pass an interim order to protect the actor’s identity from unauthorized misuse. The court’s intervention follows a detailed presentation of evidence highlighting the widespread exploitation of his name, likeness, and personal information across digital platforms. The case underscores the growing legal challenges faced by celebrities in combating the proliferation of deepfakes, explicit content, and unregulated merchandise that infringe on their intellectual property and privacy. The court was presented with concrete examples of websites that paired Naga Chaitanya’s name with explicit search terms to manipulate traffic, as well as listings for unauthorized merchandise featuring his image. The suit also cited instances of manipulated content and defamatory material related to his personal life, which have been circulating online without his consent. Despite prior efforts by the actor to address these violations, including the issuance of cease-and-desist notices and legal complaints to intermediaries, online platforms, and service providers, the defendants either failed to respond adequately or provided only partial compliance. This allowed the infringing material to persist, with some platforms even monetizing the unauthorized content. Naga Chaitanya’s legal team has sought a dynamic injunction, a legal mechanism that enables courts to extend protection to new infringing URLs as they emerge without requiring repeated litigation.#deepfakes #ai_generated_content #delhi_high_court #naga_chaitanya #nagarjuna_akkineni

FIFA World Cup Faces Broadcasting Deadlock in India Amid Policy Shifts The FIFA World Cup, set to begin on June 12, is facing a critical challenge in India, where no broadcaster has secured the rights to air the tournament. Despite the country’s massive population of 1.4 billion and its potential as a major market, structural issues in sports broadcasting have left the event without a clear platform. The situation highlights deeper economic and regulatory shifts that have disrupted India’s sports media landscape. FIFA initially valued the India media rights package for the 2026 and 2030 tournaments at nearly $100 million, but the figure was later reduced to $35 million after minimal interest. Even this lower valuation failed to attract serious bids, with the best offer reportedly coming from a Reliance-backed joint venture at $20 million. FIFA’s refusal to accept this amount has left the rights in limbo, just weeks before the tournament’s start. Legal efforts to resolve the issue have also stalled. On May 12, the Delhi High Court issued a notice to the Union government and Prasar Bharati, following a petition that labeled the World Cup a “sporting event of national importance.” The petition sought directions to ensure the tournament reaches Indian viewers through free-to-air platforms like Doordarshan and DD Sports. However, the court’s notice does not guarantee a resolution, as the petition remains a legal push rather than a confirmed deal. A key legal question remains: whether the Sports Broadcasting Signals Act’s mandatory sharing provisions apply since India is not competing in the tournament. The broader issue lies in the collapse of India’s sports broadcasting model, which was once driven by cricket dominance and the lucrative fantasy gaming industry.#india #delhi_high_court #fifa_world_cup #reliance #prasar_bharati

Delhi High Court Upholds Dismissal of Retired Air Force Officer The Delhi High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the dismissal of Corporal Sachin Kumar Solanki, a retired Indian Air Force officer, and upheld the decision to remove him from service. In an order dated May 19, 2026, a Division Bench comprising Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Amit Mahajan affirmed the Armed Forces Tribunal’s (AFT) ruling that his removal was lawful. The court rejected his claims of procedural impropriety and disproportionate punishment, emphasizing the unique operational requirements of the military. Corporal Solanki, who joined the Indian Air Force in 2011 as an Airman-Communication Technician, was dismissed after an incident that led to his removal from service. He had previously challenged the decision through legal channels, but the court found that his actions violated internal disciplinary protocols. The petitioner, now referred to as Ex-Corporal (Retd), had not utilized the IAF’s internal redressal mechanisms before publicly airing grievances on social media. The case began when Solanki contested his dismissal before the Principal Bench of the AFT in New Delhi. His original application was dismissed on October 17, 2025, with the tribunal ruling that the administrative action was lawful. The AFT held that there was no violation of natural justice, the punishment was not arbitrary, and the decision was consistent with military discipline. In its review, the Delhi High Court reiterated that courts intervene in military disciplinary matters only in exceptional cases involving patent illegality or disproportionate punishment. The bench noted that the armed forces operate under strict hierarchies and operational demands, which require strict adherence to internal protocols.#indian_air_force #delhi_high_court #corporal_sachin_kumar_solanki #armed_forces_tribunal #air_force_order_17_2015

Delhi High Court Imposes ₹30 Lakh Fine on Google for Trademark Misuse The Delhi High Court has ruled that Google violated trademark laws by using Hindware’s registered mark “HINDWARE” as a keyword in its AdWords advertising program, imposing a ₹30 lakh fine on the tech giant. The court’s May 22 judgment, delivered in two commercial suits filed by Hindware (through its predecessor HSIL) against Google and other entities, concluded that Google’s role in facilitating the unauthorized use of the trademark for commercial gain constituted active participation in trademark infringement. The case originated in 2013–14 when Hindware, a leading sanitaryware manufacturer, alleged that its competitors, including Grohe India and Cera Sanitaryware, had exploited its trademark by purchasing “HINDWARE” and related keywords like “HINDWARE SANITARY” on Google’s AdWords platform. These keywords were used to display sponsored links to the competitors’ websites as the first search results when users typed “HINDWARE.” Hindware argued that this practice caused consumer confusion and undermined its brand’s reputation. During the trial, Grohe, Cera, and Omkara Infoweb settled with Hindware, leaving Google India and Google LLC as the remaining defendants. Hindware emphasized the strength of its brand, which had been recognized as a well-known trademark by the Delhi High Court in earlier litigation. It contended that Google’s role in managing keyword auctions, suggesting trademarks via its keyword planner, and ranking ads made it an active participant in the infringement. The company argued that Google’s use of the trademark as a keyword for identical goods (sanitaryware) created a likelihood of confusion among consumers.#google #delhi_high_court #hindware #adwords #trademark_misuse

Indian Sanitaryware Brand Wins Legal Battle Against Google Over Trademark Infringement The Delhi High Court has ruled that Google’s practice of auctioning trademarked brand names as advertising keywords in its Google Ads program constitutes clear trademark infringement. The court ordered the tech giant to permanently stop using the term “HINDWARE” or its variations as keywords in its advertising system and awarded Rs 30 lakh in damages to Hindware, an Indian sanitaryware manufacturer. The case, which spanned over a decade, centered on whether Google’s pay-per-click model violated trademark laws by allowing competitors to divert traffic to their websites using a registered brand’s name. The dispute began in 2013 when Hindware discovered that competing brands, including Cera Sanitaryware and Grohe, were purchasing the trademark “HINDWARE” as a keyword through Google AdWords. This practice led to customers searching for Hindware being shown results from these competing brands, which Hindware argued constituted “unfair competition” and “trademark dilution.” While Cera and Grohe eventually settled with Hindware, the legal battle against Google continued, focusing on whether the search engine’s role in facilitating keyword bidding qualified as trademark infringement under India’s Trade Marks Act. The court’s 163-page judgment emphasized Section 29(6)(d) of the Trade Marks Act of 1999, which defines unauthorized use of a registered trademark as including advertising in digital formats, such as sponsored search keywords. Justice Pushkarna ruled that Google’s AdWords program allowed competitors to exploit Hindware’s brand reputation by bidding on the term “HINDWARE,” effectively diverting potential customers to their websites.#google #delhi_high_court #hindware #trade_marks_act #google_ads

Delhi High Court Orders Status Quo in Sindi Dry Port Case, Next Hearing Scheduled for July 16 The Delhi High Court has directed that the status quo remain in place in the ongoing dispute over the Multimodal Logistics Park (Sindi dry port) project until the next hearing on July 16. The court’s decision follows a legal challenge by Delta Corp, a company whose contract for developing the dry port was terminated in September 2023. Delta Corp had filed the petition after Hyderabad-based AMR India emerged as the successful bidder in a fresh tender for the project. The court has adjourned the matter to July 16, effectively halting the signing of the final contract with National Highways Logistics Management Limited (NHLML), which is overseeing the development of the dry port. The Sindi dry port, a flagship initiative of Union Minister for Road Transport and Highways Nitin Gadkari, is being developed by NHLML. Delta Corp’s contract was terminated in September 2023 on the grounds that the company failed to meet the step-by-step milestones required for infrastructure development as a concessionaire. After Delta Corp filed a petition in court challenging the termination, an arbitration process was initiated. However, Delta Corp again approached the court in late 2023 after AMR India secured the contract, arguing that the arbitration proceedings were still ongoing. Despite the issuance of a letter of award to AMR India, the court has ordered that the company be notified of the status quo order and requested its response before proceeding. The dry port is projected to be one of the largest logistics facilities in the region, with the potential to significantly reduce transportation costs.#nitin_gadkari #delhi_high_court #delta_corp #amr_india #national_highways_logistics_management_limited

Delhi High Court Grants Temporary Relief to Karisma Kapoor’s Children in Inheritance Dispute The Delhi High Court on Thursday granted temporary relief to Karisma Kapoor’s children, who are embroiled in a legal battle over the inheritance of their late father, Sanjay Kapoor. The court ordered that Sanjay Kapoor’s assets, including real estate, companies, and financial holdings, be preserved pending further legal proceedings. Background of the Dispute Sanjay Kapoor, a prominent businessman and co-founder of the Sonu Comstar Group, died suddenly on June 12, 2025, at the age of 53, following a heart attack during a polo match in the UK. His death sparked a legal tussle over his vast assets, valued at over $3.6 billion, which were reportedly left to his third wife, Priya Sachdev Kapoor, in a will dated March 21, 2025. Karisma Kapoor, Sanjay’s first wife, and their two children—Aisha and Arjun—allege that the will is fraudulent and that Priya, along with her associates, colluded to manipulate the document to seize control of the family’s wealth. The children filed a petition in court, accusing Priya of orchestrating a conspiracy to unlawfully acquire the assets and exclude other heirs. Court’s Orders and Legal Arguments The court temporarily barred Priya from transferring or disposing of Sanjay’s assets, including real estate, shares, and cryptocurrency holdings. Justice [Name] emphasized that the court would scrutinize the validity of the will and the allegations of fraud. Karisma’s legal team argued that the will was fabricated and that Priya’s actions—such as concealing the document for over a month before revealing it during a family meeting—suggested intent to defraud. They cited evidence of Priya’s alleged collusion with two associates, Dinesh Agrawal and Nitin Sharma, to hide the will.#delhi_high_court #karisma_kapoor #sanjay_kapoor #priya_sachdev_kapoor #sonu_comstar_group

Dehradun Police Encounter and the 2009 Murder Case: A 17-Year Legal Saga In a recent incident on Wednesday night, a police officer in Dehradun, Prem Nagar, was shot by three criminals fleeing after a robbery. The suspects, accused of stealing 2 lakh rupees, opened fire on the officer and his team, wounding him. This event marks the first time in 17 years that a criminal was killed in an encounter, breaking a long-standing policy of the Dehradun police to avoid lethal force. The incident echoes a dark chapter in the region’s history: the 2009 murder of an MBA student, Rana Bir Singh, by police officers. The case, which sparked nationwide outrage, revealed a premeditated and brutal operation. According to postmortem reports, Singh was subjected to 22 gunshot wounds and 28 signs of torture before being killed. The police initially claimed it was a "gunfight," but subsequent investigations by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) exposed it as a fabricated encounter. The 2009 Case: A Fabricated Encounter Rana Bir Singh, a 23-year-old student from Gaziabad, was allegedly killed during a "gunfight" with police in Ladpur forest in 2009. However, the CBI’s 2014 investigation uncovered a conspiracy. The report stated that Singh was tortured, beaten, and then shot multiple times. The police had fabricated evidence to cover up the crime, including staged bullet wounds and false witness accounts. The case led to the conviction of 17 police officers, including inspectors, constables, and senior officials. The court sentenced them to life imprisonment, with seven receiving the death penalty. However, the Delhi High Court later acquitted 11 officers, citing lack of direct involvement in the murder.#supreme_court #central_bureau_of_investigation #delhi_high_court #dehradun_police #rana_bir_singh

Arvind Kejriwal Boycotts Hearing In Liquor Policy Case Before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma Aam Aadmi Party leader Arvind Kejriwal has decided to withdraw from further proceedings in the CBI liquor policy case pending before Delhi High Court Judge Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, citing a loss of confidence in the fairness of the judicial process. In a letter addressed to the judge, Kejriwal stated that his decision was inspired by the principles of Gandhian satyagraha, emphasizing that justice must not only be done but also appear to be done. He argued that the proceedings before the court did not meet this fundamental standard, prompting his refusal to participate. Kejriwal’s letter to Justice Sharma, which he described as written “in all humility and with complete respect for the judiciary,” highlighted his concerns about the impartiality of the proceedings. He claimed that the language used in the judge’s order rejecting his recusal application conveyed the perception that his plea was a personal attack on the judge and the institution. This, he argued, made it impossible to believe in an impartial hearing. The judge had previously dismissed Kejriwal’s application for recusal, citing apprehensions of bias on his part. The case involves revision petitions filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against the trial court’s order discharging Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Sigh, and other accused in the liquor policy corruption case. Kejriwal had previously raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest, pointing to the professional engagements of Justice Sharma’s children. Both of the judge’s children are empanelled as government counsel and receive case assignments from the Solicitor General.#right_to_information_act #central_bureau_of_investigation #delhi_high_court #arvind_kejriwal #swarana_kanta_sharma

Delhi High Court Postpones Verdict on Arvind Kejriwal's Recusal Plea in Liquor Policy Case Delhi High Court Judge Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma postponed her verdict on pleas by Arvind Kejriwal and others seeking her recusal in the liquor policy case. Originally scheduled for 2:30 pm, the court delayed its decision to 4:30 pm after accepting Kejriwal’s submission as a written filing. Justice Sharma stated that the court would not alter its procedural rules for any litigant, emphasizing that the recusal matter would be treated as written submissions rather than a formal rejoinder. Kejriwal, appearing in person without legal representation, argued that the registry’s refusal to accept his rejoinder was a “miscarriage of justice.” Justice Sharma acknowledged the court’s earlier leniency in allowing him to file an additional affidavit after the recusal matter had been reserved for orders. She clarified that under registry rules, parties appearing in person must seek permission to file documents, and since the case was not “extraordinary,” the standard procedure was followed. The judge also noted that there is no legal concept of a “rejoinder” to written submissions, and she would ensure Kejriwal’s concerns were addressed through the written record. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the CBI, opposed Kejriwal’s request, asserting that no court in India accepts post-reservation filings. He reiterated that the court should apply standard procedures to all litigants and warned against setting a precedent for unfounded recusal claims. Kejriwal, however, accused Justice Sharma of bias, alleging a “direct conflict of interest” due to her children being empanelled central government lawyers who receive work through the solicitor general.#manish_sisodia #cbi #delhi_high_court #arvind_kejriwal #justice_swarana_kanta_sharma

Delhi Excise Policy Case: Kejriwal To Appear Before High Court Again, Demands Judge's Recusal Arvind Kejriwal, former Chief Minister of Delhi and leader of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), will appear virtually before the Delhi High Court on Monday in the ongoing excise policy case. He has once again raised concerns about potential conflicts of interest involving Justice Swarnakanta Sharma, the judge presiding over the case. Kejriwal submitted a counter affidavit earlier this week, alleging that the judge’s children are involved in government legal panels and hold positions that could compromise impartiality. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has strongly opposed these claims, calling them a dangerous precedent that could undermine judicial independence. Kejriwal’s argument centers on the fact that Justice Sharma’s son and daughter are part of the legal panel for the central government, which includes cases where the government is a party. He asserts that this creates a conflict of interest, as the judge’s family members are involved in cases that could overlap with the excise policy case. The CBI has dismissed these allegations as an attempt to tarnish the judiciary, warning that if such claims are accepted, judges would be unable to preside over cases involving government entities due to the prevalence of familial ties in legal panels. The case originated when a trial court discharged Kejriwal and Manish Sisodia, a senior AAP leader, in the Delhi liquor policy scandal. The lower court ruled that the CBI’s investigation was flawed and lacked credibility, leading the agency to file a petition with the High Court.#central_bureau_of_investigation #delhi_high_court #arvind_kejriwal #aam_aadmi_party #justice_swarnakanta_sharma

After calling 'Dhurandhar 2' makers thieves, Rajiv Rai assures the High Court he won't talk about the film while the case is in mediation The Delhi High Court has directed filmmaker Rajeev Rai to refrain from making public comments about the legal dispute involving the film Dhurandhar 2 while the case is under mediation. The court emphasized that once a matter is referred to mediation, parties involved must exercise restraint in discussing the case publicly to avoid disrupting the process. Rai, who had previously criticized the makers of Dhurandhar 2 as "thieves" for allegedly using the song Oye Oye (Tirchi Topi Wale) without permission, was ordered to submit an undertaking to the court confirming he would not engage with the media or make further statements about the dispute. The legal conflict arose when Trimurti Films, the production house behind the song, filed a case against the makers of Dhurandhar 2 for unauthorized use of the track. The court, presided over by Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, noted that Rai had continued to make public remarks about the case despite the mediation process being initiated. The judge stressed that litigants must respect the judicial process and avoid actions that could escalate the dispute outside the courtroom. Senior Advocate Swathi Sukumar, representing Rai, assured the court that her client would comply with the order and avoid commenting on the matter during mediation. The court highlighted that mediation is a critical step in resolving disputes, and public discourse could undermine its effectiveness. It warned that such restraint is necessary to prevent the dispute from intensifying and to maintain the integrity of the legal process.#dhurandhar_2 #delhi_high_court #rajeev_rai #trimurti_films #justice_tushar_rao_gedela

Delhi Liquor Policy Case: Arvind Kejriwal Seeks Recusal of High Court Judge Over Alleged Bias Arvind Kejriwal, the former Chief Minister of Delhi, has formally requested the Delhi High Court to recuse Justice Swaran Kanta Sharma from the ongoing liquor policy case, citing perceived bias and procedural irregularities. The plea, which outlines 10 reasons, has sparked significant legal and political debate, with Kejriwal accusing the judge of favoring the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its affiliated organizations. Timeline of Events The case traces back to 2021, when Kejriwal’s government introduced the Delhi Liquor Policy to reform the state’s alcohol trade. The policy aimed to curb black-market activities and increase revenue for the government. However, it faced allegations of corruption and favoritism, leading to a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) probe. In February 2024, the trial court acquitted Kejriwal and 22 other accused, including his former deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia, on charges of corruption and misuse of power. The CBI challenged the trial court’s verdict, and the Delhi High Court took up the case. On March 9, Justice Sharma dismissed the trial court’s order, citing “improper” remarks against CBI officials. The judge also imposed a stay on the trial court’s recommendation to initiate disciplinary action against the CBI’s investigating officer. Kejriwal’s 10 Reasons for Recusal Kejriwal’s petition to the High Court outlines 10 grounds for the judge’s recusal, including: Association with RSS-linked organizations: Kejriwal alleges that Justice Sharma has participated in events organized by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), a right-wing group, raising concerns about impartiality.#bharatiya_janata_party #delhi_high_court #arvind_kejriwal #rashtriya_swayamsevak_sangh #swaran_kanta_sharma

Salman Khan Supports Rajpal Yadav Amid Award Show Controversy During the Screen Awards ceremony held in Mumbai on 5 April, actor Rajpal Yadav faced a moment of embarrassment when host journalist Saurabh Dwivedi made a joke about his bounced check case. The incident occurred as Yadav was speaking about rising dollar rates and youth issues. Dwivedi quipped, “Whether the dollar rate rises or falls, you’ll have to return as much as you borrowed,” referencing Yadav’s financial troubles. The comment left Yadav visibly uncomfortable, and he eventually laughed awkwardly. The video of the exchange quickly went viral, sparking backlash against Dwivedi and calls for accountability. In response to the controversy, Bollywood superstar Salman Khan publicly defended Yadav. On his official X account, Khan shared a post stating, “Rajpal bhai, you’ve been working for 30 years and we’ve all repeatedly told you that you know your craft and bring value. The truth is, your work will always come, and it will come at this dollar rate too.” He also addressed the humor around currency fluctuations, writing, “Remember that sometimes things slip out of the flow. If you have to give something, keep it in your mind and work from the heart. Whether the dollar is high or low, the money has to be given in India.” Yadav, who has long been a collaborator with Khan in films like Partner, Mujhe Pyar Kya Karte Ho, and Mujhe Pyar Kya Karte Ho, took to social media to clarify the situation. He released a video apologizing to Dwivedi and comedian Javed, calling them “like my younger brothers.” Yadav emphasized that the incident was a “cinema-related matter” and urged people to avoid criticizing Dwivedi, stating, “If you insult Saurabh, you’re insulting me too.#salman_khan #delhi_high_court #rajpal_yadav #saurabh_dwivedi #screen_awards

Delhi High Court Orders Removal of 'Obscene' Honey Singh and Badshah Song The Delhi High Court on April 2, 2026, issued a directive for the removal of a 2006 song by rappers Yo Yo Honey Singh and Badshah, labeling it as "vulgar, patently obscene, and derogatory towards women." The court’s order followed a petition alleging that the track’s lyrics perpetuated misogynistic and dehumanizing content, normalizing the objectification of women. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, presiding over the case, emphasized that the song’s language went beyond mere offensiveness, describing it as "ex facie misogynistic, dehumanising, and calculated to normalise the treatment of women as objects of ridicule and sexual gratification." The court’s decision came amid growing public and legal scrutiny over the song’s impact, which had sparked debates about the boundaries of artistic expression and the responsibilities of creators in addressing gender-based harm. The lyrics, which were central to the petition, were criticized for their explicit references to women as "sluts" and "playthings," with critics arguing that such content reinforced harmful stereotypes and contributed to a culture of misogyny. The petition, filed by a group of activists and legal experts, contended that the song’s widespread popularity had amplified its negative influence, particularly among younger audiences. Justice Kaurav’s ruling highlighted the court’s role in balancing free speech with societal welfare. While acknowledging the importance of artistic freedom, he stressed that the song’s content crossed into territory that "endangers the dignity and safety of women.#badshah #information_technology_act #delhi_high_court #yo_yo_honey_singh #justice_purushaindra_kaurav

Delhi High Court Warns Rajpal Yadav In Rs 9-Crore Cheque Bounce Case: "Never Think Judge Is Weak" The Delhi High Court on Thursday reserved its judgment in a cheque bounce case filed by M/s Murli Projects Private Limited against actor Rajpal Yadav. Presiding over the matter, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma expressed clear displeasure at what she described as Yadav's shifting stands on repayment. The court cautioned that Yadav should not assume the judge is weak if the judge is nice to him, highlighting frustration over inconsistencies between Yadav's submissions and his legal team's arguments. The case stems from a May 2024 sessions court order that convicted Yadav in a cheque bounce matter and sentenced him to six months' imprisonment. The Delhi High Court later suspended the sentence after his counsel assured that the dispute would be settled, even referring the matter to mediation. However, the court observed that despite repeated assurances and adjournments, Yadav failed to honour his commitments. Yadav had previously assured the court that he would deposit Rs 2.5 crore in instalments but did not fulfill these promises. In February 2026, the High Court directed him to surrender for non-compliance, and his plea seeking more time was rejected. He surrendered on February 5 and remained in custody until he secured an interim suspension of his sentence after depositing Rs 1.5 crore. During the latest hearing, counsel for the complainant, advocate Avneet Singh Sikka, argued that Yadav could not evade liability merely because he had served his sentence. He emphasized that completion of punishment does not extinguish financial liability, pointing out that Rs 7.75 crore still remained unpaid, although approximately Rs 2 crore had been paid earlier before the trial court.#delhi_high_court #rajpal_yadav #justice_swarana_kanta_sharma #murli_projects_private_limited #avneet_singh_sikka

Delhi High Court Reserves Verdict in Rajpal Yadav's Rs 9 Crore Debt Case, Actor Makes Emotional Plea The Delhi High Court has reserved its verdict in the long-standing legal dispute involving actor Rajpal Yadav, who faces a Rs 9 crore debt case. The actor, who was previously incarcerated in Tihar Jail over a cheque bounce case, made an emotional plea during the latest hearing, which took place on April 2. Despite multiple attempts to reach a settlement and sustained judicial intervention, the court could not resolve the matter, leading to the reservation of its judgment. The case, which has drawn significant public attention, centers on a financial dispute between Yadav and Murali Projects Pvt Ltd, a Delhi-based entity. The actor was initially convicted under the Negotiable Instruments Act in 2018 for dishonoring a cheque, resulting in a six-month jail sentence. This ruling was later upheld by a sessions court in 2019. Over time, the outstanding amount grew to nearly Rs 9 crore, primarily due to the failure of his 2012 film Ata Pata Laapata, which underperformed at the box office and led to significant financial losses. During the hearing, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, who presided over the case, expressed frustration with Yadav’s inconsistent stance on repaying the debt. The judge remarked, “I am not getting my answers. The undertaking said something else, and now you are saying something else,” highlighting the lack of clarity in the actor’s financial obligations. Advocate Avneet Singh Sikka, representing the complainant, argued that Yadav had already accepted his conviction and could not now avoid liability. He pointed out that a revision petition filed in 2024 was delayed by 1894 days without sufficient justification, further complicating the case.#delhi_high_court #rajpal_yadav #murali_projects_pvt_ltd #negotiable_instruments_act #tihar_jail

PDP president Mehbooba Mufti on Friday (March 20, 2026) urged Prime Minister Narendra Modi to address escalating communal tensions in Delhi's Uttam Nagar, where reports of violence against Muslims have sparked fears of widespread unrest ahead of Eid. In a post on X, Ms. Mufti condemned the actions of "right wing fanatics and lumpen elements" in the area, claiming they were inciting violence against Muslim communities. She warned that the situation could lead to "rivers of blood" and expressed concern over the panic and displacement of Muslim families fleeing the area. Mufti called on Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah to act swiftly to prevent further bloodshed, emphasizing the need for intervention before the crisis worsens. The tensions in Uttam Nagar have intensified since the death of 26-year-old Tarun, who was killed in a clash between his family and neighbors in the JJ Colony area on March 4. The incident occurred during Holi celebrations when water from a balloon thrown by a girl from Tarun's family splashed on a woman from a neighboring family, according to police. The violence escalated as some Hindu groups organized protests against the killing, leading to the torching of two vehicles belonging to members of Tarun's family. Police have since arrested 14 individuals, including two minors, in connection with the incident. Meanwhile, security measures around the Uttam Nagar East metro station have been heightened following a directive from the Delhi High Court to prepare for potential unrest during the Eid festival. The court's order aims to ensure safety amid growing concerns about communal clashes in the region.#delhi_high_court #uttam_nagar #mehbooba_mufti #narendra_modhi #tarun

Delhi High Court Orders Takedown Of Posts Linking Union Minister Hardeep Puri's Daughter To Jeffrey Epstein, But No Global Relief The Delhi High Court on Tuesday granted interim relief to Himayani Puri, the daughter of Union Minister Hardeep Puri, seeking the removal of posts linking her to American financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Justice Mini Pushkarna issued an order directing social media platforms such as Twitter, Google, YouTube, Meta, LinkedIn, and other unnamed entities to take down the allegedly defamatory content. However, the court clarified that the global takedown request would be addressed separately by a division bench, and for now, the focus is on content within India. The case is scheduled for further hearing on August 7. Himayani Puri has filed a defamation lawsuit worth Rs. 10 crore, seeking a "john doe" order to remove the content. Her legal team, led by Senior Advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, argued that the allegations against her are false and part of a coordinated campaign targeting her due to her father’s political position. Jethmalani claimed that the accusations are baseless and part of an effort to discredit her, citing previous targeting of the minister’s wife for alleged illegal property acquisition. He emphasized that if content is uploaded from devices in India, a global takedown is permissible, regardless of the user’s location. In response, Meta’s counsel, Senior Advocate Arvind Datar, stated that the platform can only enforce removal within India and cannot comply with global takedown orders. Datar argued that the issue of global enforcement is pending before a division bench and that intermediaries like Meta cannot act without a court directive.#jeffrey_epstein #meta #delhi_high_court #hardeep_puri #himayani_puri