The Supreme Court will deliver its judgement on the Karnataka Hijab Ban issue, on October 13. The Apex Court bench comprising Justice Hemant Gupta and Sudhanshu Dhulia will pronounce the awaited verdict. The judgement is said to be significant, as the matter was heard by the court for 10-days, with the involvement of as many as 21 lawyers from the petitioner's side, whereas Solicitor General Tushar Mehta from Karnataka Government.
Courtesy: ANI News
Karnataka High Court has ordered for the compensation of a 56-year-old man over wrongful arrest due to a confusion in his name. The Hon'ble court noted that the man's identification was not cross-checked and verified, and awarded a compensation of Rs 5 lakh. Reportedly, Ningaraju N, a resident of Bangalore's Kalidasa layout, was arrested in a 2011 criminal case, in confusion with accused Raju NGN.
Courtesy: Hindustan Times
Raids are being conducted by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) at numerous locations across the nation that are directly or indirectly related to Chinese mobile phone firms. More than 30 places have been investigated. ED is looking for Vivo and its affiliated businesses. Earlier, the Karnataka High Court had blocked an ED Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA) seizure of Xiaomi assets.
Courtesy: India today
The Xiaomi-Enforcement Directorate case was reviewed by the Karnataka High Court (HC) single-bench judge SG Pandit, and has reserved its judgment, on June 16. Notably, the Chinese firm Xiaomi filed a case against ED, after the agency seized Rs 5,551.27 crore from its bank accounts. The mobile company is facing violation charges of the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act, not allowing the seized money to use for business.
Courtesy: The Free Press Journal
In a relief to Bishop Prasanna Kumar Samuel, an accused in rape case, the Karnataka High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, case. On June 15, the HC judge Hemant Chandanagoudar ordered to quash proceedings after there were no evidence of the offences charged against Bishop. Notably, police dropped proceedings against Bishop, a district magistrate issued fresh summons… read-more
Courtesy: Press Trust of India
New developments were reported in Karnataka Hijab Row after two students returned home without giving board examinations in Udupi. Pre University students Aliya Assadi and Resham had appeared at the examination center in burqas and were denied to enter despite attempts to convince invigilators, who were abiding by the HC orders, which restricted burqas at educational institutions. Notably, the two students were the ones, who challenged Hijab-… read-more
Students in Chennai protested against the Karnataka HC dismissing petitions for a ban on hijab in educational institutions. The hijab controversial started in January when several female students were not allowed to enter the college premises with a hijab. They stood outside to protest, which caught up with other places boys wearing saffron scarves. On February 5, a court order banned all religious attires to be worn in schools and colleges… read-more
Karnataka HC announced their judgement over the ongoing Karnataka Hijab Row, pending since January 5. The court upheld the restrictions imposed by pre university, and said wearing Hijab is not an essential part of the Islamic community. The HC bench comprising Justice Ritu Raj Awasthi, Krishna S Dixit and JM Khazi announced the verdict, on March 15. The court bench dismissed all the petitions filed against the restrictions.
Amid the ongoing Hijab row, Karnataka High Court on February 22, stated that the court wishes to dispose the case by this week. During the court proceedings, the counsel for the petitioners requested a relaxation for the girls, allowing them to wear Hijab in schools and colleges. Chief Justice Ritu Raj Aswathi said, "make all endeavours to finish this case by the end of this week".
Courtesy: Press Trust Of India
The Karnataka Hijab row hearing continued for the fifth day, on February 17. During the hearing, the advocate representing petitioners, requested "mediation" in the matter, asking permission from the HC. Responding to the issue, the HC bench said, the matter involves constitutional rights angle, restricting mediation. However, the HC asked advocates to see if parties are convinced for a mediation process and adjourned the case to February 18… read-more
Courtesy: One India