Editorji is a popular short video news and information platform based in India. It was founded in 2018 by Vikram Chandra, one of India’s leading journalists, and has risen to prominence in the digital news space in a relatively short span of time. The platform is primarily designed for mobile devices, with applications available for Android and iOS.

ABOUT US:

about us editorji

Latest Video News: Editorji provides the latest news video headlines, latest videos clip from India and the World. Get all breaking news videos on Entertainment, Business, Coronavirus, Elections, Politics and more.

Latest Video News, Breaking News, Bollywood, Political, Sports, Business News | Editorji

+91 11 4035 6666 / info@editorji.com
3rd floor, Plot B, Khasara no 360, Sultanpur, New Delhi, Delhi 110030
<a title="mail to us" href="mailto:info@editorji.com">Send Feedback</a>
<a title="Contact Us" href="mailto:info@editorji.com">Contact Us</a>

REACH US

Contact for any questions, suggestions, comments, feedback or advertisement on Editorji.com, we are always looking forward to hearing from you.

Contact Us for Feedback, Suggestions and Advertising 

Editorji content is better experienced in our app.

Andhra CM says SC judge conspiring against him, writes to CJI

In an unprecedented move, Andhra Pradesh CM YS Jagan Mohan Reddy has written to the CJI, alleging that&nbsp;a Supreme Court judge is conspiring to topple his govt

In an unprecedented move, Andhra Pradesh CM YS Jagan Mohan Reddy has accused a Supreme Court judge and the state high court of conspiring to topple his govt, reports said. In a letter to CJI SA Bobde, Jagan has alleged that a top court judge, who is seen as CJI-in-waiting is acting on behalf of TDP leader and former CM Chandrababu Naidu to destabilise his government. The letter also states that the SC judge was influencing the Andhra Pradesh High Court, and it names the High court Chief Justice and four other judges. The CM has also listed out cases and examples to allege that judgments have been delivered in favour of the Telugu Desam leaders and to obstruct the work of his govt.

In an unprecedented move, Andhra Pradesh CM YS Jagan Mohan Reddy has accused a Supreme Court judge and the state high court of conspiring to topple his govt, reports said. In a letter to CJI SA Bobde, Jagan has alleged that a top court judge, who is seen as CJI-in-waiting, is acting on behalf of TDP leader and former CM Chandrababu Naidu to destabilise his government. The letter also states that the SC judge was influencing the Andhra Pradesh High Court, and it names the High court Chief Justice and four other judges. The CM has also listed out cases and examples to allege that judgments have been delivered in favour of the Telugu Desam leaders and to obstruct the work of his govt.

Hathras gangrape: What SC said on protection of victim's family

While directing the Uttar Pradesh govt to file an affidavit about the steps taken to protect the witnesses in the case and also inform if the victim&rsquo;s family chosen a lawyer, the Supreme Court termed the&nbsp;Hathras&nbsp;gangrape &lsquo;horrible&rsquo; and &lsquo;shocking&rsquo;.&nbsp;&nbsp;
Senior Advocate Indira Jaising who appeared on behalf of some intervenors told the Supreme Court that fair investigation warrants protection of the victim&rsquo;s family and witnesses in the case. The UP govt however argued that the family was already under protection. The SC&nbsp;asked&nbsp;UP govt to submit a report by October 8.&nbsp;&nbsp;
While saying it will&nbsp;it will ensure that the&nbsp;probe&nbsp;is smooth in the case, the&nbsp;SC&nbsp;bench&nbsp;of&nbsp;Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justices A&nbsp;S Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian&nbsp;also asked to know if the victim&rsquo;s family had chosen a lawyer. &nbsp;
&nbsp;The apex court&nbsp;heard&nbsp;a PIL seeking a CBI or a SIT probe monitored by a sitting or retired Supreme Court or High Court judge. &nbsp;&nbsp;
The UP govt while expressing willingness for a court-monitored CBI probe said that false narratives were being spread in the case with political motive and a CBI probe would ensure vested interests are unable to create such narratives. &nbsp;&nbsp;

While directing the Uttar Pradesh govt to file an affidavit about the steps taken to protect the witnesses in the case and also inform if the victim&rsquo;s family chosen a lawyer, the Supreme Court termed the&nbsp;Hathras&nbsp;gangrape &lsquo;horrible&rsquo; and &lsquo;shocking&rsquo;.&nbsp;&nbsp;
 &nbsp;((GFX TEXT: &lsquo;Protection of victim&rsquo;s pivotal&nbsp;for&nbsp;fair probe&rsquo;&nbsp; SC to UP govt: want it on record if witness protection plan is in place))&nbsp;
&nbsp; Senior Advocate Indira Jaising who appeared on behalf of some intervenors told the Supreme Court that fair investigation warrants protection of the victim&rsquo;s family and witnesses in the case. The UP govt however argued that the family was already under protection. The SC&nbsp;asked&nbsp;UP govt to submit a report by October 8.&nbsp;&nbsp;
 ((GFX TEXT:&nbsp;SC will &lsquo;ensure that probe in smooth&rsquo;&nbsp; SC to UP govt:&nbsp;has&nbsp;victim&rsquo;s family chosen an advocate?))&nbsp;&nbsp;
 While saying it will&nbsp;it will ensure that the&nbsp;probe&nbsp;is smooth in the case, the&nbsp;SC&nbsp;bench&nbsp;of&nbsp;Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justices A&nbsp;S Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian&nbsp;also asked to know if the victim&rsquo;s family had chosen a lawyer. &nbsp;
&nbsp; The apex court&nbsp;heard&nbsp;a PIL seeking a CBI or a SIT probe monitored by a sitting or retired Supreme Court or High Court judge. &nbsp;&nbsp;
 ((GFX TEXT: UP govt:&nbsp;fake narratives being spread&nbsp;with political motive))&nbsp;&nbsp; UP govt: CBI probe&nbsp;to&nbsp;ensure no&nbsp;fake&nbsp;narratives&nbsp;are created))&nbsp;&nbsp;
 The UP govt while expressing willingness for a court-monitored CBI probe said that false narratives were being spread in the case with political motive and a CBI probe would ensure vested interests are unable to create such narratives. &nbsp;&nbsp;

While directing the Uttar Pradesh govt to file an affidavit about the steps taken to protect the witnesses in the case and also inform if the victim&rsquo;s family chosen a lawyer, the Supreme Court termed the&nbsp;Hathras&nbsp;gangrape &lsquo;horrible&rsquo; and &lsquo;shocking&rsquo;.&nbsp;&nbsp;
Senior Advocate Indira Jaising who appeared on behalf of some intervenors told the Supreme Court that fair investigation warrants protection of the victim&rsquo;s family and witnesses in the case. The UP govt however argued that the family was already under protection. The SC&nbsp;asked&nbsp;UP govt to submit a report by October 8.&nbsp;&nbsp;
While saying it will&nbsp;it will ensure that the&nbsp;probe&nbsp;is smooth in the case, the&nbsp;SC&nbsp;bench&nbsp;of&nbsp;Chief Justice S A Bobde and Justices A&nbsp;S Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian&nbsp;also asked to know if the victim&rsquo;s family had chosen a lawyer. &nbsp;
&nbsp;The apex court&nbsp;heard&nbsp;a PIL seeking a CBI or a SIT probe monitored by a sitting or retired Supreme Court or High Court judge. &nbsp;&nbsp;
The UP govt while expressing willingness for a court-monitored CBI probe said that false narratives were being spread in the case with political motive and a CBI probe would ensure vested interests are unable to create such narratives. &nbsp;&nbsp;

Bhushan pays ₹1 fine, says 'doesn't mean I've accepted verdict'

Advocate Prashant Bhushan on Monday deposited the Re 1 fine but he does not accept the&nbsp;accept the Supreme Court&thinsp;judgement which recently held him guilty of criminal contempt for his tweets criticising the apex court and Chief Justice of India SA Bobde. Bhushan has filed a review petition in the Supreme Court on Monday against its judgment convicting him and imposing a fine of Re 1. He had filed a fresh petition on Saturday, seeking the right of appeal against the original criminal contempt cases.

Prashant Bhushan paid Re 1 fine, filed petition against conviction

Advocate Prashant Bhushan on Monday deposited ₹1 fine but said he does not accept the&nbsp;accept the Supreme Court&thinsp;judgement which recently held him guilty of criminal contempt for his tweets criticising the apex court and Chief Justice of India SA Bobde.
The lawyer-activist said just because he is paying fine, it doesn't mean he has accepted the verdict.&nbsp;
Bhushan&nbsp;filed a review petition in the Supreme Court on Monday against its judgment convicting him and imposing a fine.
He had filed a fresh petition on Saturday, seeking the right of appeal against the original criminal contempt cases.

Centre tells Delhi HC India’s values don’t recognise same-sex marriage

The Centre on Monday opposed a plea seeking recognition and registration of same-sex marriages under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956, before the Delhi High Court. Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta argued before the division bench of Chief Justice D.N. Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan that India&rsquo;s law and society does not &lsquo;recognise same-sex marriage&rsquo; , adding that the Supreme Court &lsquo;merely decriminalizes homosexuality or lesbians&rsquo;. &lsquo;Such registration if granted, would run contrary to the statutory provisions already in place&rsquo;, he said. A man and a woman is essential for a marriage to not fall within degrees of the prohibited relationship under the Hindu Marriage Act.

Centre opposes same-sex marriage registration
Centre: India's values don't recognise same-sex marriage
'Such registration contrary to the statutory provisions': SGI
&nbsp;

The Centre on Monday opposed a plea seeking recognition and registration of same-sex marriages under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1956, before the Delhi High Court. Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta argued before the division bench of Chief Justice D.N. Patel and Justice Prateek Jalan that India&rsquo;s law and society does not &lsquo;recognise same-sex marriage&rsquo; , adding that the Supreme Court &lsquo;merely decriminalizes homosexuality or lesbians&rsquo;. &lsquo;Such registration if granted, would run contrary to the statutory provisions already in place&rsquo;, he said. A man and a woman is essential for a marriage to not fall within degrees of the prohibited relationship under the Hindu Marriage Act.

'Judges now afraid of the Bar': Bar President writes to Chief Justice

Dushyant&nbsp;Dave, the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association has&nbsp;written a scathing letter to the Chief Justice of India claiming that we was not allowed to speak at the virtual farewell of Justice Arun&nbsp;Mishra. He claimed that despite being invited to the event he was kept on mute and he eventually exited when Justice Mishra&nbsp;started speaking and he realised the 'game plan'. The senior advocate said that he was not allowed to speak because the Supreme Court had come a level where the judges are afraid of the Bar. Expressing his strong disappointment over the incident he added that he will never participate in an event organised by the Supreme Court till his term as president of the Supreme Court Bar Association ends in December.&nbsp;

Dushyant&nbsp;Dave, the president of the Supreme Court Bar Association has&nbsp;written a scathing letter to the Chief Justice of India claiming that we was not allowed to speak at the virtual farewell of Justice Arun&nbsp;Mishra. He claimed that despite being invited to the event he was kept on mute and he eventually exited when Justice Mishra&nbsp;started speaking and he realised the 'game plan'. The senior advocate said that he was not allowed to speak because the Supreme Court had come a level where the judges are afraid of the Bar. Expressing his strong disappointment over the incident he added that he will never participate in an event organised by the Supreme Court till his term as president of the Supreme Court Bar Association ends in December.&nbsp;

chief justice

Categories