LawLoveLegal

Supreme Court Expresses Concern Over CBI’s Disturbing Findings in Kolkata Doctor’s Rape and Murder Case In a recent hearing, the Supreme Court of India voiced its deep concern regarding the disturbing findings presented by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the ongoing investigation into the rape and murder of a doctor at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital , a state-run facility in Kolkata, West Bengal . The case, which the Supreme Court took up suo motu , has brought attention to severe discrepancies in the investigation, particularly in the handling of evidence and the overall probe process. CBI’s Findings Raise Alarm in the Court A bench comprising Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud , along with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra , expressed their dismay after reviewing the status report submitted by the CBI. The court stated that the findings in the report are "really disturbing," and echoed concerns raised by a lawyer regarding inconsistencies, such ...

Delhi HC Judge Recuses from Hearing  Sukesh Chandrashekhar's Plea Recusal by Justice Subramonium Prasad On Wednesday, Delhi High Court's Justice Subramonium Prasad recused himself from hearing a plea filed by Sukesh Chandrashekhar, the alleged conman, who sought permission for increased meetings with his legal counsel. The recusal is attributed to the complex nature of Chandrashekhar's multiple legal cases, which could potentially create a conflict of interest or necessitate a different judicial perspective. Plea for Increased Legal Consultations Chandrashekhar's plea requested an increase in the number of meetings with his lawyers from two to five times a week. His legal team argued that the current limit of virtual meetings was insufficient for managing his defense effectively, given the complexity of his legal issues, which include high-profile corruption and extortion cases. Chandrashekhar's request cited a precedent involving Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwa...

Delhi High Court Allows Termination of 32-Week Pregnancy  Due to Foetal Abnormality The Delhi High Court has granted permission to a married woman to medically terminate her 32-week pregnancy due to significant abnormalities in the foetus. The decision was made after considering recommendations from the AIIMS Medical Board and the well-being of the petitioner. Court's Decision and Reasoning Justice Sanjeev Narula, in his order dated July 13, highlighted that continuing the pregnancy posed a significant risk to the petitioner’s physical and mental health and was likely to result in the birth of a child with severe health issues. Therefore, the court found it appropriate to allow the termination in the best interests of both the petitioner and the unborn child. AIIMS Medical Board's Evaluation The AIIMS Medical Board had thoroughly evaluated the case, counseling the petitioner and her husband about the procedure and risks involved in such a late-term termination. The petitioner c...

Investigation into Alleged Assault on Swati Maliwal: Delhi Police May Visit CM's House to Record Statements The Delhi Police may visit the Chief Minister's residence on Friday to record statements from the policemen and staff present during the alleged assault on Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) MP Swati Maliwal, according to sources. FIR Filed and Section 164 Statements An FIR was filed at the Civil Lines police station on Thursday regarding the alleged assault on Swati Maliwal, AAP's Rajya Sabha MP. Maliwal has accused Bibhav Kumar, the personal secretary to Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, of physically assaulting her. The police plan to record Maliwal's statement before a magistrate under Section 164 of the Criminal Procedure Code. This section allows a magistrate to record statements or confessions during a police investigation before a trial. Details of the Alleged Incident Maliwal made a PCR call from the Chief Minister's house at 9:34 PM on May 13, reporting the assault...

Supreme Court Stays Allahabad HC's Striking Down of Madrasa Education Act The Supreme Court of India has intervened in a significant legal matter concerning the 'UP Board of Madarsa Education Act 2004', staying the judgement of the Allahabad High Court that had previously struck down the act. According to the petitioner's lawyer, Pradeep Kumar Yadav, the apex court deemed the High Court's order as unconstitutional and contradictory to secularism and fundamental rights. Legal Implications and Key Points of the Supreme Court Order Pradeep Kumar Yadav, representing the petitioner, highlighted crucial aspects of the Supreme Court's decision. Firstly, the apex court refuted the Allahabad High Court's assertion that 'secular' education was lacking in Madrasas. Secondly, it rejected the High Court's claim of unconstitutionality regarding the Madrasa Education Act. Moreover, the Supreme Court emphasized the provision of the right to education, particular...