Latest news with #RajeshBindal
NDTV
3 hours ago
- Politics
- NDTV
Top Court Refuses To "Gag" Media From Covering Dharmasthala Mass Burial Case
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday refused to gag media from reporting on the Dharmasthala mass burial case in Karnataka. A bench of Justices Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan, however, directed a trial court in Karnataka to decide afresh the plea filed by the secretary of the Dharmasthala Temple seeking removal of what he alleged was defamatory content targeting the family managing the temple. The top court noted gag orders were passed only in extremely rare cases and asked the petitioner to place all materials before the trial court. The bench clarified it hadn't expressed opinion on the merits of the matter The high court on August 1 set aside a gag order issued by a Bengaluru civil court restraining reportage on the burial case. The gag order was over reports on the alleged murders of women in Dharmasthala in the state's Dakshina Kannada district. The petitioner's lawyer alleged around 8,000 YouTube channels were running defamatory material against the temple. Harshendra Kumar D, Secretary of the Dharmasthala Temple body, moved the apex court seeking removal of the alleged defamatory content. On July 23, the CJI-led bench declined to hear another petition filed by YouTube channel Third Eye challenging a sweeping gag order that restrained media houses from reporting on matters related to the brother of Dharamadhikari D Veerendra Heggade of Dharamsthala in Karnataka. The plea, filed against an ex parte interim order of a local court, questioned the legality of the directive which directed as many as 390 media houses to remove nearly 9,000 links and stories related to the Dharamsthala burial case. The gag order was passed in Kumar's defamation suit alleging spread of false and defamatory online content, despite the absence of specific allegations against him or the temple authorities in any FIR. Karnataka Home Minister G Parameshwara recently said a thorough investigation must precede any conclusions regarding the alleged murders of women in Dharmasthala. The state government has constituted a special investigation team to probe the allegations.
Hindustan Times
8 hours ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Dharmasthala burial row: SC refuses to gag media from covering case
New Delhi, The Supreme Court on Friday refused to gag media from reporting on the Dharmasthala mass burial case in Karnataka. Dharmasthala burial row: SC refuses to gag media from covering case A bench of Justices Rajesh Bindal and Manmohan, however, directed a trial court in Karnataka to decide afresh the plea filed by the secretary of the Dharmasthala Temple seeking removal of what he alleged was defamatory content targeting the family managing the temple. The top court noted gag orders were passed only in extremely rare cases and asked the petitioner to place all materials before the trial court. The bench clarified it hadn't expressed opinion on the merits of the matter The high court on August 1 set aside a gag order issued by a Bengaluru civil court restraining reportage on the burial case. The gag order was over reports on the alleged murders of women in Dharmasthala in the state's Dakshina Kannada district. The petitioner's lawyer alleged around 8,000 YouTube channels were running defamatory material against the temple. Harshendra Kumar D, Secretary of the Dharmasthala Temple body, moved the apex court seeking removal of the alleged defamatory content. On July 23, the CJI-led bench declined to hear another petition filed by YouTube channel Third Eye challenging a sweeping gag order that restrained media houses from reporting on matters related to the brother of Dharamadhikari D Veerendra Heggade of Dharamsthala in Karnataka. The plea, filed against an ex parte interim order of a local court, questioned the legality of the directive which directed as many as 390 media houses to remove nearly 9,000 links and stories related to the Dharamsthala burial case. The gag order was passed in Kumar's defamation suit alleging spread of false and defamatory online content, despite the absence of specific allegations against him or the temple authorities in any FIR. Karnataka Home Minister G Parameshwara recently said a thorough investigation must precede any conclusions regarding the alleged murders of women in Dharmasthala. The state government has constituted a special investigation team to probe the allegations. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
India Today
29-07-2025
- Politics
- India Today
Justice Rajesh Bindal flags use of AI search models, leading to 'fake judgements'
"In India and in the USA, the use of AI search models by young lawyers has led to 'fake judgments,' being placed before courts," said Justice Rajesh Bindal on at an event organised by the All India Senior Lawyers Association, Justice Rajesh Bindal, a sitting Judge of the Supreme Court (SC) of India, said that Senior lawyers have a "responsibility to mentor" young young lawyers against over reliance on technology, Justice Bindal gave examples of incorrect information being cited by AI (Artificial Intelligence) search models. "Sometimes lawyers search on AI using one or two keywords and they cite judgments... it may be incorrect, it may have been the minority they don't know have been instances of the AI created it's own fake judgments and opinions which get presented before Court," said Justice Bindal."This is the danger mark of AI that it generates fake judgments and information. Senior lawyers need to groom the Young Bar about these dangers," said the SC judge."It was said we judges do a lot of work, but the core behind it is the research done by the young lawyers and the arguments made by the Senior counsels," said Bindal was speaking at the felicitation ceremony organised by the All India Senior Advocates Association for the four new Judges elevated to the Supreme Court in the last month- Justice Joymalya Bagchi, Justice Nilay V Anjaria, Justice Vijay Boshnoi and Justice Atul S Chandurkar. Justices Bindal and PB Varale were the "senior" members of the Bench attending the Advocate and MP P Wilson, Senior Advocate Adish Aggarwala and Senior advocate Pitambari Acharya shared the dais with the at the event, Senior Advocate and Parliamentarian P Wilson told the gathering that he had introduced a Private Members Bill to increase the retirement age of Judges before the Parliament.- EndsTune InMust Watch
Time of India
21-06-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
SC stays Telangana HC's probe into govt land fraud in Shamshabad
HYDERABAD: The Supreme Court has stayed the Telangana HC's probe into fraudulent ownership claims over 100 acres of govt land in Shamshabad. A Supreme Court bench of Justice MM Sundresh and Justice Rajesh Bindal passed this interim order after hearing a special leave petition filed by Mohammed Taher Khan of Hyderabad challenging the HC order against his claim. On April 10, a bench headed by Justice T Vinod Kumar of the Telangana HC concluded that Khan's claim was based on fabricated documents and directed the state to constitute a special investigation team to probe. He directed the judicial registrar of the HC to file an FIR before Charminar police station as the claimant went to the extent of creating fake judicial orders to grab govt land. The HC bench passed this order while hearing a plea by HMDA which questioned a Rangareddy civil court order. Putting forward the case of HMDA, additional advocate general T Rajanikanth Reddy said litigants have been resorting to fraudulent means to grab govt land to the extent of 180 acres (including the current 100 acres) at Shamshabad acquired by the state in 1990. The HC bench had a probe done internally and concluded that the claimants created judicial orders purported to have been passed in 1988 in the name of Justice N D Patnaik, who was not even elevated as an HC judge at that time. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Free P2,000 GCash eGift UnionBank Credit Card Apply Now Undo The bench ordered fresh FIR and a probe by govt. It directed the registrar to ensure all judicial officers are warned not to act upon the fabricated orders. The HC ordered status quo in the land case until further investigation. It was this order that was challenged by Taher Khan in Supreme Court. The apex bench issued notices to the state and stayed the HC order.
United News of India
28-05-2025
- Business
- United News of India
SC upholds Tribunal order validating 1967 Gift Deed, rejects benami allegation based on retrospective law
New Delhi, May 27 (UNI) The Supreme Court has upheld an order of the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal that set aside the declaration of a 1967 gift deed as a benami transaction, ruling that the genuineness of a registered gift cannot be questioned due to a retrospective amendment in law made decades later. A bench, comprising Justices Rajesh Bindal and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, dismissed an appeal challenging the Tribunal's order, which had been overturned by the Calcutta High Court. The Supreme Court restored the Tribunal's decision, holding that the High Court erred in treating the gift deed as questionable based on an amendment introduced in 1989 to the West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955, with retrospective effect. 'The genuineness of the registered gift deed executed on December seven, 1967 could not be put in doubt merely because of a legislative amendment introduced over two decades later,' the Court observed. The bench added, 'If that argument were accepted, the entire holding could have been distributed to evade land ceiling provisions. However, the fact remains that even after the 1967 gift to his children, 8.806 acres of land remained with Iswar Chandra Pal and was rightfully declared surplus and vested in the State.' Notably, in 1967, Iswar Chandra Pal executed a registered gift deed transferring 20.88½ acres of land to his sons and daughters. This transfer was reflected in the revenue records by 1969. After Pal's death in 1975, the State declared 8.80 acres of his remaining land as surplus and took possession of it. Following the 1989 amendment to the Land Reforms Act, proceedings were initiated to re-examine land holdings under Sections 14T(3), 14M, and 14S of the Act. In 1997, a Revenue officer held that the 1967 gift deed was a 'benami' transaction and declared 17.9 acres of land as surplus, allowing the family to retain only 8.65 acres. The family appealed, and the Tribunal later set aside the Revenue officer's order. However, the High Court, on a writ petition by the State, remanded the matter for reconsideration, treating the gift deed as potentially 'benami'. Challenging the High Court's order, the appellants argued that it was legally unsound to treat a valid 1967 gift deed as 'benami' simply because of a law amended in 1989. Agreeing with the appellants, the Supreme Court held that the retrospective application of the amendment could not invalidate a transaction that was lawful and registered decades earlier. 'It would be illogical to assume that one could anticipate future land ceiling laws and structure transactions accordingly,' the bench said. The Court concluded that the High Court had wrongly interfered with the Tribunal's order, as the facts of the case did not permit more than one interpretation. It therefore allowed the appeal and reinstated the Tribunal's decision.
