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.

The Delhi High Court directed the Congress and Aam Aadmi Party to take down within 24 hours social media posts linking BJP leader Dushyant Kumar Gautam to the 2022 Ankita Bhandari murder case, citing defamation concerns.

Delhi High Court Orders Removal of Defamatory Posts Against BJP’s Gautam

Court Orders Removal of Defamatory Posts Against Gautam

The Delhi High Court directed the Congress and Aam Aadmi Party to take down within 24 hours social media posts linking BJP leader Dushyant Kumar Gautam to the 2022 Ankita Bhandari murder case, citing defamation concerns.

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday directed the Congress and Aam Aadmi Party to remove within 24 hours social media posts linking BJP leader Dushyant Kumar Gautam to the 2022 Ankita Bhandari murder case.&nbsp;
In an interim order passed on a defamation lawsuit by Gautam, Justice Mini Pushkarna also restrained the two political parties from posting any content targeting the BJP national secretary as the alleged "VIP" in the murder case.&nbsp;
The court also passed the interim order against other persons and entities, including Urmila Sanawar and Uttarakhand Pradesh Congress Committee.&nbsp;
Justice Pushkarna said Gautam had made out a prima facie case in his favour and if the interim order to restrain the hosting of the "defamatory" content was not passed, irreparable injury would be caused to him.&nbsp;
The judge clarified that if the content was not taken down within 24 hours, the social media platfrom would remove the same as per the rules.&nbsp;
In 2022, 19-year-old Bhandari, a receptionist at the Vanantra Resort in Pauri district, was murdered. The resort owner, Pulkit Arya, and two employees, Saurabh Bhaskar and Ankit Gupta were subsequently arrested and sentenced to life imprisonment by a sessions court for the crime.&nbsp;
An audio clip recently released by actor Urmila Sanawar, who claims to be the wife of former MLA Suresh Rathore, allegedly mentioned a 'VIP' allegedly linked to the case.&nbsp;

The Delhi High Court has directed the Centre to file a detailed response to a PIL seeking a reduction in GST on air purifiers, citing severe air pollution in the national capital.

Delhi High Court Seeks GST Reduction on Air Purifiers

Delhi HC Pushes for GST Cut on Air Purifiers

The Delhi High Court has directed the Centre to file a detailed response to a PIL seeking a reduction in GST on air purifiers, citing severe air pollution in the national capital.

The Delhi High Court on Friday directed the Centre to file a detailed response to a petition seeking lowering of goods and services tax on air purifiers in view of worsening air quality in the national capital.&nbsp;
A vacation bench of Justices Vikas Mahajan and Vinod Kumar granted 10 days' time to the central government to file its reply to the petition and listed the matter for further hearing on January 9.
The court was informed by the Centre's counsel that the meeting of GST Council has to take place physically only and it is not possible to convene the meeting through video conferencing. Additional Solicitor General N Venkataraman, representing the Centre, sought time to file a detailed reply.
The court was hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking directions to the central government to classify air purifiers as "medical devices" and reduce the goods and services tax (GST) to the five per cent slab. Air purifiers are currently taxed at 18 per cent.
The petition by advocate Kapil Madan said that purifiers cannot be treated as luxury items in view of the "extreme emergency crisis" caused by severe air pollution in Delhi. On December 24, the court had directed the GST Council to meet at the earliest and consider lowering or abolishing GST on air purifiers.
The matter was listed today to inform the court as to when the Council can meet and whether it was possible for the Council to meet virtually, if not physically.

Unnao rape case survivor terms Kuldeep Singh Sengar’s Delhi HC bail “kaal” for her family and announces plan to challenge verdict in Supreme Court.

Unnao rape case survivor to move SC against suspension of Sengar's jail term

Unnao rape case survivor terms Kuldeep Singh Sengar&rsquo;s Delhi HC bail &ldquo;kaal&rdquo; for her family and announces plan to challenge verdict in Supreme Court.

The 2017 Unnao rape case survivor on Wednesday termed the Delhi High Court's decision to suspend the jail term of expelled BJP leader Kuldeep Singh Sengar "kaal (death)" for her family and said that she would move the Supreme Court against it.
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday suspended the sentence of Sengar, who is serving life imprisonment in the case, and ordered his release on bail pending the disposal of his appeal against his conviction by a trial court in December 2019.
In its order, the high court directed that Sengar shall not come within a 5-kilometre radius of the victim's residence and shall not threaten the survivor or her mother. It also said violation of the conditions would automatically lead to cancellation of bail.
Sengar, however, will remain in jail since he is also serving 10 years' imprisonment in the custodial death case of the victim's father and has not been granted bail in that case.
Reacting to the verdict, the survivor, who was a minor when she was kidnapped and raped by Sengar in 2017, told PTI over phone from Delhi that security for her family members, lawyers and witnesses had already been withdrawn and the court's decision had deepened her fears.
"If the convict gets bail in a case like this, how will the country's daughters remain safe? For us, this decision is no less than 'kaal' (death)," she said. "Those with money win, those without money lose," she rued.
The survivor, who was heading out with her mother to stage a protest near Mandi House against the verdict, added that she would challenge the HC order in the Supreme Court.
Women's rights activist Yogita Bhayana, who staged a protest with the survivor's mother at India Gate on Tuesday night, shared on X a video of the survivor and her mother.
In the video, the survivor claimed that she left home in the morning to meet her lawyer, who had called her to sign some papers and go to the Supreme Court, and Bhayana. However, she claimed, CRPF personnel tried to send her back home.
"I was shouting that I need to visit my lawyer. I was shouting in the vehicle as well and then the order came from the top to take me (to meet my lawyer)," she said. "All I want is that justice should be done," she added.
Bhayana claimed that the survivor was injured in the melee. Bhayana also shared a clip of her phone conversation with the survivor from earlier in the day.
In the clip, the survivor is heard saying that she was not being allowed to go and meet her lawyer, and the security personnel were taking her back home. Bhayana then asks her to get down from the vehicle and tell the security personnel that she won't go with them.
The survivor also claimed that her mother was thrown in the middle of the road after being removed from India Gate during her protest on Tuesday. A senior police officer, however, said, "We removed the protesters from the site around 8.45 pm on Tuesday and placed them in a CRPF bus. No further action was taken."
Bhayana told PTI Videos that the survivor is scared for her life.
The Unnao rape case and other connected cases were transferred from Uttar Pradesh to Delhi on the directions of the Supreme Court in August 2019.
Meanwhile, the mother of the 2012 Nirbhaya gang rape victim, Asha Devi, extended support to the Unnao rape case survivor and her family. The HC's decision was "unfortunate" and would send a "wrong message" to society, she said.
Speaking to PTI, she said granting bail to a life convict in a rape case would embolden wrongdoers and weaken faith in the justice system. "How can such a person be released? This will open the doors for other rape accused to approach courts for bail. It gives strength to those who commit such crimes," she said, adding that the decision would adversely impact the safety of women and girls across the country.
Asha Devi said the protests against the HC verdict are justified and urged the court to reconsider its order. "The victim's family wants justice. What has happened is injustice not only to them but to all daughters and women of this country," she said.

The Delhi High Court criticized the Centre over IndiGo’s flight disruptions, which stranded thousands and triggered fare surges up to Rs 40,000. The court sought answers on preventive measures, passenger compensation, and airline accountability.

Delhi High Court slams Centre over IndiGo flight chaos, questions soaring fares

The Delhi High Court criticized the Centre over IndiGo&rsquo;s flight disruptions, which stranded thousands and triggered fare surges up to Rs 40,000. The court sought answers on preventive measures, passenger compensation, and airline accountability.

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday questioned the Central government as to why the situation that led to the cancellation of a number of flights by IndiGo precipitated, and termed it a &ldquo;crisis&rdquo;.
The high court said besides trouble and harassment caused to the stranded passengers, the question is of the losses caused to the country's economy.
A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela also asked how other airlines could take advantage of the crisis situation and charge hefty sums for tickets from the passengers.
&ldquo;The ticket which was available for Rs 5,000, the prices went up to Rs 30,000 to Rs 35,000. If there was a crisis, how could other airlines be permitted to take advantage? How can it (ticket price) go up to Rs 35,000 and Rs 39,000? How could other airlines start charging," asked the bench, which heard the matter for more than one-and-a-half hours.
The bench directed that by January 22, the next date of hearing, if the inquiry initiated by a committee is complete, its report should be submitted to the court in a sealed cover.
"We appreciate the steps taken by the Ministry of Civil Aviation and the DGCA but what bothers us is how such a situation was allowed to precipitate, leading to stranding of lakhs of passengers at airports across the country.
This has not only caused trouble to the passengers but also affected the economy of the country as in the present day, fast movement of passengers is an important aspect to keep the economy moving," the bench said.
The court was informed by the counsel for the Centre and the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) that the statutory mechanism was totally in place and a show-cause notice was issued to Indigo, which apologised profusely.
The government&rsquo;s counsel also said the crisis precipitated on account of various non-compliances of the guidelines issued by the authorities from time to time, including flight duty hours of the crew members.
It said the unprecedented surge has been controlled and capped, which was never done before.
The court was hearing a public interest litigation seeking directions to the Centre to provide support and refunds to passengers affected by the cancellation of hundreds of flights by IndiGo.
During the hearing, the bench expressed dissatisfaction over the manner in which the petition was filed without any research and documentation.
The counsel for IndiGo informed the court that the crisis occurred on account of multitude of factors, including unforeseen issues.
The court directed the airline to make arrangements for compensating the stranded passengers, not only for cancellation of flights but also for other troubles caused to them.
&ldquo;Since a committee has already been constituted where IndiGo will have an opportunity to put forth its case, we refrain from making any observation as to the reason for disruptions of flight operations of respondent No. 3 (airline).
While we have taken cognisance of the issue in public interest, we make it clear that the observations are aimed to ensure that best public interest is served both by the government and the airline (IndiGo)," the bench said.
The court also directed the authorities to ensure that the situation normalises soon and all airlines employ adequate number of pilots.

The Delhi High Court has safeguarded Hrithik Roshan’s personality and publicity rights, directing removal of certain social media posts misusing his name, image, or AI-generated content, with further hearing set for March 2026.

Delhi HC protects Hrithik Roshan’s personality rights, orders removal of objectionable posts

The Delhi High Court has safeguarded Hrithik Roshan&rsquo;s personality and publicity rights, directing removal of certain social media posts misusing his name, image, or AI-generated content, with further hearing set for March 2026.

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday protected the personality and publicity rights of Bollywood actor Hrithik Roshan and directed removal of certain objectionable posts against him on social media.
Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora said it was not passing any ex-parte directions, at the interim stage, for removal of certain fan pages and said an order would be passed after hearing them.
The court, which listed the matter for further hearing on March 27, 2026, said it would pass a detailed interim injunction order later.
The court was hearing a plea by Roshan seeking to protect his personality rights and restrain online platforms from illegally using his name, images and AI-generated inappropriate content.
Recently, Bollywood actor Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, her husband Abhishek Bachchan, filmmaker Karan Johar, Telugu actor Akkineni Nagarjuna, "Art of Living" founder Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and journalist Sudhir Chaudhary also approached the high court seeking protection of their personality and publicity rights and the court granted them interim relief.
Singer Kumar Sanu's similar plea is also pending in the high court.
The right to publicity, popularly known as personality rights, is the right to protect, control and profit from one's image, name or likeness.&nbsp;

A bomb threat via email forced the evacuation of Delhi High Court, with judges, lawyers, and staff rushing out as police and bomb disposal squads launched search operations.

Bomb Threat at Delhi High Court Leads to Evacuation

Bomb Threat Evacuates Delhi High Court

A bomb threat via email forced the evacuation of Delhi High Court, with judges, lawyers, and staff rushing out as police and bomb disposal squads launched search operations.

A bomb threat spread panic in the Delhi High Court for litigants and judges alike, prompting the latter to rise abruptly.
The pandemonium followed an e-mail through which the court administration received the threat of the attack in the high court.
This prompted the police and other agencies to launch a search operation.
According to sources, the e-mail was received by the registrar general at around 8.39 am and some of the judges were informed about it.
When the judges were conducting proceedings, their court staff came and informed them about the bomb threat e-mail after which they rushed out of the courtrooms.
While some of the judges started rising at around 11.35 am, others kept holding their respective courts till 12 noon. A bomb disposal squad also reached the high court premises.
Security was beefed up and everyone present in the court premises was asked to vacate.
Police said a PCR call was received in the morning regarding an e-mail claiming the presence of a bomb in the court premises.
&ldquo;We are carrying out search operations. Fire officials along with the bomb disposal squad and dog squad are present at the spot,&rdquo; a senior police official said.
Several lawyers, court staff and clerks said they have been asked to vacate the premises.
According to the sources, the e-mail said "as a sample, today&rsquo;s blast in the Delhi High Court will clear the doubts of previous bluffs and judges&rsquo; chambers will detonate shortly after the mid-day Islamic prayers".
They said the e-mail said three bombs have been placed in judges&rsquo; rooms/court complex and everyone should vacate the court complex by 2 pm.&nbsp;

The Delhi High Court will hear on July 30 petitions challenging the Centre’s approval for the release of the film Udaipur Files based on the Kanhaiya Lal murder case.

Delhi HC to Hear Pleas Challenging 'Udaipur Files' Release

Delhi HC to Hear 'Udaipur Files' Case

The Delhi High Court will hear on July 30 petitions challenging the Centre&rsquo;s approval for the release of the film Udaipur Files based on the Kanhaiya Lal murder case.

The Delhi High Court on Monday said it would hear on July 30, the pleas challenging the Centre's nod to release the film "Udaipur Files - Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder".
The court was also informed that an application has been made by the producers of the film to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for re-certification of the movie, and it is likely to be considered shortly.
A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela listed the pleas for hearing on Wednesday after a request for adjournment was made on behalf of one of the petitioners.
The two petitions were listed before the high court in pursuance to the Supreme Court&rsquo;s direction to the petitioners to approach the high court against the Centre&rsquo;s decision of giving nod for the film&rsquo;s release.
The petitions have been filed by Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind president Maulana Arshad Madani and Mohd Javed, who is an accused in the Kanhaiya Lal murder case.
The apex court, on July 25, had said that film-makers' appeal against the high court order staying the film's release was infructuous for they had accepted the July 21 Centre nod for the film's release, subject to six cuts in its scenes and modifications in the disclaimer.
Udaipur-based tailor Kanhaiya Lal was murdered in June 2022 allegedly by Mohammad Riyaz and Mohammad Ghous.
The assailants later released a video claiming that the murder was in reaction to the tailor allegedly sharing a social media post in support of former BJP member Nupur Sharma following her controversial comments on Prophet Mohammed.
The case was probed by the NIA and the accused were booked under the stringent Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, besides provisions under the IPC.
The trial is pending before the special NIA court in Jaipur.

Delhi High Court judges, new judges oath, Vinod Kumar judge, Shail Jain judge, Madhu Jain judge, Delhi HC strength, Delhi Judicial Service, judicial appointments India, Supreme Court collegium recommendations

Delhi HC's three new judges take oath of office, total strength now 43

Justices Vinod Kumar, Shail Jain, and Madhu Jain took oath as Delhi High Court judges, raising the working strength to 43. The ceremony was conducted by Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya.

Justices Vinod Kumar, Shail Jain, and Madhu Jain took oath as Delhi High Court judges, raising the working strength to 43. The ceremony was conducted by Chief Justice D.K. Upadhyaya.

Three new judges on Thursday took oath of office, taking the strength of the Delhi High Court to 43.
Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya administered oath of office to Justices Vinod Kumar, Shail Jain and Madhu Jain. The swearing-in ceremony was held in the high court premises.
All the three judicial officers, who have been elevated to the high court, took oath in Hindi.
With their swearing-in, the high court's strength has gone up to 43. The sanctioned strength of the high court is 60.
The Centre had on July 22 notified the appointment of three judicial officers of the Delhi district judiciary as judges of the high court.
The three officers, who joined the Delhi Judicial Service in 1992, were serving as principal district and sessions judges at various trial courts prior to their elevation -- Vinod Kumar was posted at Karkardooma court, Madhu Jain at Tis Hazari court and Shail Jain at Saket court.
The Supreme Court collegium headed by Chief Justice of India B R Gavai on July 1 had recommended the names of judicial officers Shail Jain and Madhu Jain as judges of the Delhi High Court. A day later, the collegium had also recommended judicial officer Kumar&rsquo;s name.
On July 21, six other judges -- Justices V Kameswar Rao, Nitin Wasudeo Sambre, Vivek Chaudhary, Anil Kshetrapal, Arun Kumar Monga and Om Prakash Shukla -- had taken oath of office of the Delhi High Court.

Six judges took oath in Delhi High Court, raising its strength to 40. Justices from various high courts joined, reshaping the court's collegium structure.

New Judges Sworn in at Delhi High Court, Total Rises to 40

Delhi High Court Swears in Six New Judges

Six judges took oath in Delhi High Court, raising its strength to 40. Justices from various high courts joined, reshaping the court's collegium structure.

Six new judges on Monday took oath of office, taking the strength of the Delhi High Court to 40.
The six new judges were administered the oath of office by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya at a ceremony held in the high court premises.
The six judges are Justices V Kameswar Rao, Nitin Wasudeo Sambre, Vivek Chaudhary, Anil Kshetrapal, Arun Kumar Monga and Om Prakash Shukla.
With their swearing-in, the high court's strength has gone up to 40. The sanctioned strength of the high court is 60.
While Justice Chaudhary took oath in Hindi, the other five judges took oath in English.
Justice Sambre earlier served in the Bombay High Court, while Justices Chaudhary and Shukla were in the Allahabad High Court.
Justice Kshetarpal was in the Punjab and Haryana High Court and Justice Monga was in the Rajasthan High Court. Justice Rao has been repatriated to Delhi from the Karnataka High Court.
The Delhi High Court's senior-most judge, Justice Vibhu Bakhru was bid farewell on July 16 on his elevation as the Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court.
The reshuffling has also result in reconstitution of the high court's three-member collegium.
Till now the high court collegium comprised Chief Justice Upadhyaya, Justice Bakhru and Justice Prathiba M Singh. However, after the swearing-in ceremony, the collegium will now consist of Chief Justice Upadhyaya and Justices Rao and Sambre as they are senior to Justice Singh.
The Central government on July 14 notified the transfer of these six judges from their respective high courts to the Delhi High Court based on the recommendations made by the Supreme Court collegium.

Delhi High Court dismisses Celebi’s plea against BCAS security clearance revocation, citing national security concerns amid strained India-Turkey ties.

Delhi HC junks Turkish firm Celebi's plea against revocation of security clearance

Delhi High Court dismisses Celebi&rsquo;s plea against BCAS security clearance revocation, citing national security concerns amid strained India-Turkey ties.

The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed Turkish-based firm Celebi's challenge to the revocation of its security clearance by aviation watchdog BCAS in the "interest of national security".
Justice Sachin Datta dismissed the petitions after reserving the verdict on May 23.
The Bureau of Civil Aviation Safety (BCAS) on May 15 revoked the security clearance, days after Turkey backed Pakistan and condemned India's strikes on terror camps in the neighbouring country.
Celebi Airport Services India Pvt Ltd and Celebi Delhi Cargo Terminal Management India Pvt Ltd oversee ground handling and cargo terminal functions at various airports in the country.
The Central authority's counsel had defended the action, pointing out an "unprecedented" threat to aviation security.
Celebi's counsel had contended that the Centre's move was against the principles of natural justice and in violation of the procedure under the Aircraft Security Rules.
He said the Director General of Bureau of Civil Aviation Security ought to have given the petitioners a hearing after giving notice of "proposed punishment" and subsequently given reasons for their action.
On May 19, the Centre said the decision to revoke clearance was taken in the interest of national security in light of certain inputs that continuing the services of the petitioner companies would be hazardous in the current scenario.
Celebi, operating in the Indian aviation sector for over 15 years and employing over 10,000 people, offers its services at nine airports.
BCAS, in its order, said, "... the security clearance in r/o Celebi Airport Services India Pvt Ltd is hereby revoked with immediate effect in the interest of national security." The security clearance to the company, part of Turkey's Celebi, was given in November 2022.

Delhi HC greenlights the transplanting of 26 trees for Supreme Court expansion, mandating CPWD to plant 260 new trees; balancing development with environmental care.

Delhi HC Approves Tree Transplant for SC Expansion

The Delhi High Court has permitted the transplantation of 26 trees for the Supreme Court building's expansion, coupled with compensatory planting, emphasizing a responsible approach to developmental projects in the capital.

Delhi HC greenlights the transplanting of 26 trees for Supreme Court expansion

Delhi HC allows CPWD to transplant 26 trees for Supreme Court expansion; mandates planting 260 trees to compensate.

The Delhi High Court has allowed the Central Public Works Department (CPWD) to transplant 26 trees for the expansion of the Supreme Court building.
Justice Jasmeet Singh said of the 26 trees to be transplanted within the top court's premises, 16 would be transplanted along the periphery of its garden whereas the rest would go near the administrative buildings complex.
The CPWD also made a compensatory plantation of 260 trees in Sundar Nursery, the judge said.
"Given that the proposed project pertains to the expansion of the Supreme Court building to accommodate additional courtrooms, including a dedicated constitutional court, as well as chambers for judges and essential facilities for lawyers and litigants, the present application needs to be allowed," the court said on March 26.
The order came on a plea filed by the CPWD seeking permission to transplant the trees.
While dealing with cases pertaining to preservation and protection of trees in the capital, the court in 2023 ordered no permission for felling of trees would be granted in the capital.
The court clarified that its permission was subject to certain conditions, including the filing of an affidavit within two weeks by a responsible CPWD officer on the aspect of the status of the 26 transplanted trees and the 260 trees planted in Sundar Nursery.
The court sought a site-specific transplantation report and a yearly affidavit indicating the survival rate and the health of the transplanted trees aside from the compensatory plantation.
The CPWD would furnish photographs of the transplanted trees to enable the amici curiae appointed in the matter to see their upkeep and maintenance, it added.
The bench said every year, pruning of the 26 trees would be ensured in a scientific manner to ensure their rejuvenation, as the past transplantation of trees showed that there was heavy pruning of trees which resulted in the trees becoming "mere logs of wood incapable of rejuvenating".
The court asked the department to obtain necessary permissions from the municipal authorities concerned to see if more trees could be planted on the road leading to the Supreme Court, which was "enveloped with fully grown trees" until the expansion of Sundar Nagar Road.

Delhi HC Judge Yashwant Varma was removed amidst a burnt cash scandal at his home. The Supreme Court is conducting an inquiry, uncovering potential conspiracy claims. Varma's proposed transfer is not linked to this incident, says SC, focusing on transparency.

Judge Varma Removed in Burnt Cash Scandal

Amidst the shocking discovery of burnt cash, Delhi High Court Judge Yashwant Varma faces suspension. The incident sparked a probe by the Supreme Court, with suggestions of conspiracy. Despite allegations, his transfer is unrelated, focusing on transparency.

Judge Yashwant Varma removed amid burnt cash scandal

Delhi High Court Judge Varma was removed after burnt cash was found at his residence. The Supreme Court is probing through a special committee. Varma denies the cash is his, alleging a conspiracy. His proposed transfer was not linked to the cash investigation.

In a dramatic turn of events, Delhi High Court Judge Yashwant Varma has been removed from active duty with immediate effect, barring further orders, after a pile of burnt cash was found at his residence during Holi.
This decision was announced by Delhi High Court Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya on Monday morning.
Justice Varma, who was appointed in October 2021, currently presides over a division bench that deals with sales tax, goods and services tax, and company appeals, as per the Delhi High Court's website.
This suspension follows the Supreme Court's formation of a three-member committee, which includes the chief justices of the Punjab and Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, and Karnataka High Courts, to probe the matter.
Last week, Justice Varma claimed neither he nor his family stored any cash in the outhouse, which he described as "disconnected from the main residence," and noted it remains unlocked and accessible to outsiders.
Declaring himself "truly shocked," he suggested a "conspiracy" against him. He also asserted that all family cash withdrawals are well-documented through regular banking channels, UPI applications, and cards.
The controversy initially erupted when reports of the cash surfaced and the Supreme Court Collegium considered transferring Justice Varma back to the Allahabad High Court.&nbsp;
This proposed transfer prompted calls for an exhaustive inquiry, including from senior advocate Harish Salve, who criticized the Collegium system as ill-equipped to handle such matters. Salve advocated the transfer be suspended until the facts are confirmed.
Subsequently, the Supreme Court clarified that Justice Varma's 'transfer' had no relation to the cash inquiry, dismissing it as "misinformation" and "rumours," and declared an in-house investigation.
In an extraordinary gesture to promote transparency, the Supreme Court released a report by the Delhi High Court, including photographs and videos, although some portions were redacted for confidentiality.
The discovery of the burned money also led to further confusion after Delhi Fire Services chief Atul Garg denied making any statements about the cash, stating he had clarified the situation with media outlets reporting false information.

Delhi High Court orders removal of videos alleging misconduct by Isha Foundation. The ruling highlights the tension between freedom of expression and protection against defamation, crucial in the digital age.

Court Orders Removal of Defamatory Isha Videos

Delhi High Court mandates the takedown of defamatory content against Isha Foundation. The ruling underscores the delicate balance between free expression and reputation protection.

Delhi High Court orders removal of defamatory videos against Isha Foundation

Delhi High Court orders removal of defamatory content against Isha Foundation by YouTuber Singh over unverified claims.

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday ordered pulling down from online platforms videos and content published by YouTuber Shyam Meera Singh against spiritual guru Sadhguru's Isha Foundation.
Justice Subramonium Prasad said the continuous circulation of the YouTube video, having a "clickbait" title, was likely to cause harm to the trust's reputation, and restrained Singh from further publishing his allegations.
The judge, in an interim order on Isha Foundation's lawsuit, directed X (formerly Twitter), Meta and Google to remove the alleged defamatory content against the foundation of Jagadish "Jaggi" Vasudev aka Sadhguru.
The court prima facie said Singh chose to make the video based on "entirely unverified material" and restrained members of the public from uploading sharing it on social media platforms till the next hearing in May.
Before uploading the video, he published tweets and posts to promote the same, the court said.
"Till now more than 9 lakh views have already been garnered on the said video and more than 13,500 comments have been received. What is more interesting is that the title of the video is 'Sadhguru EXPOSED: What's happening in Jaggi Vasudev's Ashram?'" The order added, "The title is a clickbait and this court is of prima facie opinion that the said title has been given only to attract attention." While restraining Singh from publishing further, the court ordered the social media platforms to bring down the defamatory video and all content emanating from it.
Isha Foundation's counsel said the video uploaded on February 24 showed Singh make "false, reckless, baseless and per se defamatory" allegations against the trust, including sexual abuse against children, without any basis.
He argued Singh claimed the basis of his video were certain emails sent by persons associated with the Foundation, but their veracity was not authenticated.
"We said the emails were fabricated and false. Reputation built over decades can't be dismantled like this," the counsel said.
Reputation was an integral part of the dignity of each individual, the court said, and there was a need to strike a balance between freedom of speech, freedom of expression vis-a-vis the right to reputation.
"If the video is not taken down immediately, the complainant/trust will suffer loss of reputation which cannot be compensated monetarily," it added.

The Delhi High Court refuses a fast-track plea in a case regarding alleged election violations by political parties, opting to address the matter post-elections.

Delhi High Court declines urgent hearing on plea alleging election law violations over freebies

Ahead of the Delhi elections, the High Court chooses not to expedite a case on alleged election law violations. The decision indicates a potential ruling post-election.

Delhi High Court rejects urgency in a case alleging election law violations by parties promising incentives. The court aims to handle it post-election, maintaining neutrality about the petition's merit.

Court refuses to expedite case challenging political parties' pre-poll promises, says impact already made ahead of February 5 elections.
The Delhi High Court on Monday refused to grant an urgent hearing to a plea alleging violations of election laws by political parties ahead of the Delhi Assembly polls. The bench of Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela stated that the matter would be heard in due course as per standard procedure.
&nbsp;Court Rejects Urgent 2 PM Listing Request
The petitioner&rsquo;s counsel sought an immediate listing at 2 PM, arguing that political parties had breached election norms by announcing freebies to sway voters. However, the court rejected the request, stating:
"Why 2 PM? You are challenging the actions of political parties in announcing freebies. Tomorrow is the last day for electioneering or maybe today. Whatever impact the freebies were to have has already happened," the bench remarked.
&nbsp;Freebies Debate Ahead of Delhi Elections
The petition objected to political parties announcing free incentives during the election campaign, arguing that the practice violates Supreme Court guidelines on maintaining fairness in electoral processes. However, the Delhi HC bench clarified that its decision did not reflect any stance on the merit of the case.
With Delhi going to polls on February 5 and results set for February 8, the court&rsquo;s refusal to expedite the hearing suggests that any decision on the matter will come after voting concludes.

Delhi HC dismisses a plea seeking the deregistration of AAP over alleged non-disclosure of criminal backgrounds. The petitioner can appeal to the Supreme Court, reflecting ongoing concerns about transparency and accountability in election processes.

Delhi HC refuses to direct ECI after plea seeks to cancel AAP registration 

The Delhi High Court rejected a request to cancel AAP's registration due to alleged non-disclosure of criminal records, stating the Supreme Court’s guidelines do not allow for de-recognition in such cases. Transparency in electoral processes remains a key issue.

The Delhi High Court dismissed a petition to unregister AAP over alleged non-disclosure of candidates' criminal records. The court found non-disclosure doesn't de-recognize parties. The petitioner may appeal to the Supreme Court, raising transparency concerns.

The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a plea seeking the cancellation of the Aam Aadmi Party&rsquo;s (AAP) registration, alleging the party failed to disclose criminal antecedents of its candidates in the upcoming assembly elections.
The petition, filed by Ashwin Mudgal, argued that AAP&rsquo;s non-disclosure of its alleged involvement in the liquor scam violated Supreme Court directives. The SC mandates that political parties and candidates must publish their criminal antecedents.
Mudgal's counsel claimed AAP, accused in the liquor scam, had not disclosed its status in the case, which goes against transparency norms outlined by the apex court. The petitioner sought directions to the Election Commission of India to cancel the party&rsquo;s registration.
A bench comprising Chief Justice D K Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, however, refused to entertain the plea. The court clarified that the SC&rsquo;s directive did not include a provision to de-recognise political parties for such violations.
Following the court&rsquo;s remarks, the petitioner withdrew the plea but was granted the liberty to approach the Supreme Court on the matter.
The case highlights ongoing concerns over transparency and accountability in electoral processes as political parties face scrutiny for adhering to mandated disclosure norms. &nbsp;

A petition submitted to the Delhi High Court demands the release of CAG reports before the Delhi Assembly elections, advocating for transparency.

 Delhi HC petition demands public access to CAG reports before Assembly Elections

The Delhi High Court is reviewing a petition filed by Brij Mohan demanding public release of CAG reports before Delhi Assembly elections for transparency.

A petition in Delhi HC seeks public access to CAG reports ahead of assembly polls, citing voters&rsquo; &ldquo;right to know.&rdquo; The court questioned the CAG on withholding reports and set the next hearing for Jan 24, stressing transparency in democracy.

A petition has been filed in the Delhi High Court seeking directives to ensure Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) reports are made publicly accessible ahead of the upcoming Delhi Assembly elections.
The petitioner, Brij Mohan, a retired Senior Administrative Grade officer of the Indian Audit &amp; Accounts Department (IA&amp;AD), urged the Central Government, Lt. Governor, and the CAG to publish these reports on government portals, enabling voters to assess Delhi&rsquo;s financial health.
Citing Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution, the plea argued that withholding CAG reports violates the electorate&rsquo;s fundamental &ldquo;right to know&rdquo; and termed it a &ldquo;fraud on the Constitution.&rdquo; It emphasised the CAG's pivotal role in ensuring transparency and accountability, especially during elections.
The Delhi High Court has sought clarification from the CAG, questioning why these reports cannot be released before being tabled in the assembly. The petitioner further argued that even if the assembly session is not convened, the reports should still be accessible to voters to support informed decision-making.
The petition highlighted the importance of transparency in upholding democratic values, stating that any delay in releasing the reports undermines the electorate&rsquo;s right to information and the constitutional mandate.
The court has scheduled the next hearing for January 24.
In a separate plea by LoP Vijender Gupta and six BJP MLAs, the High Court earlier criticised the Delhi government over delays in presenting CAG reports, calling the situation &ldquo;unfortunate.&rdquo;

The controversy arose after Rajat Sharma was accused of abusing Congress leader Ragini Nayak on national television during a debate on his show on June 4.

 Delhi HC orders Cong leaders to remove social media posts targeting journalist Rajat Sharma

The controversy arose after Rajat Sharma was accused of abusing Congress leader Ragini Nayak on national television during a debate on his show on June 4.

The Delhi High Court has ordered removal of social media posts by Congress leaders Jairam Ramesh, Pawan Khera and Ragini Nayak alleging that veteran journalist Rajat Sharma used "abusive language" during his show on the Lok Sabha election result day.
The court said an irreparable loss and injury would be caused to the plaintiff's reputation if the videos and posts on X were allowed to remain in the public domain.
Justice Neena Bansal Krishna said it is prima facie evident from the footage of the TV debate played in the court that plaintiff Sharma had "barely intervened for a few seconds and no abusive language was used" against Nayak.
The social media posts berating the journalist are an "over-sensationalisation", the court said.
"It cannot be denied that the citizens have a right to freedom of speech and expression but there was also a corresponding duty to remain truthful to the incident. The X posts berating the plaintiff are nothing but an over-sensationalisation and depiction of facts which are patently false," the court said in its 18-page order passed on Friday and uploaded on its website on Saturday.
The court said the balance of convenience lies in favour of the plaintiff as by making these videos private or injuncting them from being available on public platforms, no infringement on the rights of defendants will be caused.
However, the inconvenience that would result from these videos and X posts continuing to remain in the public domain may not be compensated by damages in future, it said.
"It is directed that the X posts/tweets which have not been removed be removed within seven days by defendants in terms of the Intermediary Guidelines.
"It is further directed that the videos which are in the public domain be made private by defendant No.2 (Google India) and (are) not to be put in the public domain, without the orders of this court," the court stated.
It also issued summons to the defendants including the three Congress leaders, X Corp, Google India and Meta Platforms in the lawsuit and listed it for further hearing on July 11.
Sharma's counsel had urged the court to grant ex-parte relief by ordering removal of the alleged offensive posts and videos against him on social media and restraining the political leaders from making allegations against him.
The controversy arose after Nayak accused Sharma of abusing her on national television during a debate on his show on June 4.
Sharma, the chairman and editor-in-chief of Independent News Service Private Limited (INDIA TV), was also present in the court during the hearing on Friday.
Sharma's counsel had said while the debate was happening on the channel on the evening of June 4, the Congress leaders started tweeting only on June 10 and 11.
He had contended that a clip of the show was being circulated in which an abuse had been inserted whereas the original footage does not contain any such content.
"There is no abuse. Six days after the live show, they tweet that this anchor has used (an) abuse against this lady. They held a press conference on June 11. On June 4, she did not say there was any abuse. She did not hear it on that day," the senior lawyer had submitted.
The high court said in its order that while the threshold of public criticism and alleged defamatory X posts and YouTube videos on intermediary platforms is much higher, the individual dignity and honour of a person cannot be allowed to be defamed or disrepute brought to him on the ground of the right to free speech and expression.
"No harm would be caused to the defendants if the material is restrained from remaining in public domain till the suit is adjudicated on merits, while these tweets have a potential of bringing disrepute to the plaintiff in future with practically no reparation to the damage to his reputation," it said.&nbsp;
Also watch: <a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/karnataka/petrol-diesel-to-get-costlier-in-karnataka-as-govt-hikes-sales-tax-on-fuel-1718466403860">Petrol, diesel to get costlier in Karnataka as govt hikes sales tax on fuel</a>

The court observed that five accused allegedly conspired to commit terrorist acts in India, but there was no finding against them that they actually committed any such act.

Delhi High Court quotes Dostoevsky to reduce sentence of 5 terror accused 

The court observed that five accused allegedly conspired to commit terrorist acts in India, but there was no finding against them that they actually committed any such act.

The Delhi High Court on Monday reduced to 10 years the life term awarded to allegedly highly-radicalised "over ground workers" of terror outfit Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) in a case lodged under the anti-terror law probed by the NIA.
A bench headed by Justice Suresh Kumar Kait observed that the five appellants, who had pleaded guilty before the trial court, allegedly conspired to commit terrorist acts in India but there was no finding against them that they actually committed any such act.
The court said there was nothing on record that would compel the awarding of life term under section 121A (conspiracy to commit offences against State) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and section 23 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) on "enhanced penalties", adding that the appellants were very much desirous of reforming themselves and joining the mainstream.
The court's order came on appeals filed by Bilal Ahmad Mir, Sajad Ahmad Khan, Muzaffar Ahmad Bhat, Mehraj Ud Din Chopan and Ishfaq Ahmad Bhat against the trial court's order on their sentence passed in November 2022, after they were convicted for the commission of various offences under the IPC and the UAPA.
"The man who has a conscience suffers whilst acknowledging his sin. We refer to a quote by Fyodor Dostoyevsky, the author of 'Crime and Punishment'. In chapter 19, Dostoevsky writes that 'if he has a conscience, he will suffer for his mistake; that will be punishment as well as the prison'," the bench, also comprising Justice Manoj Jain, said.
"Keeping in mind the gravity of the matter, though the appellants did not deserve any unjustifiable leniency, at the same time, considering their candid confession at the first opportunity, their relatively clean antecedents, inclination for reformation and their young age, the life sentence was not warranted either," the court said.
It said the trial court's approach should have been to "reform" and "it is a fit case where the sentence awarded under section 121A, IPC and section 23, UAPA needs to be reduced".
The court remarked that it would be hazardous to assume that merely because of their "despicable past", the appellants have no future, especially when there is nothing on record to suggest that they were beyond redemption.
It also took into account that the socio-economic reports of the appellants, who were of "young age", revealed that the economic condition of their families was "very modest" and there was no other conviction to their credit.
"They do need to be given a 'ray of hope'. In the case in hand, we are fully cognizant of the fact that the appellants had pleaded guilty at the first available opportunity, without any expectation. India has shown enough progression in all spheres and our justice delivery system is no exception. One can always condemn the sin, but not the sinner," the court observed.
"We do feel that in the present case, ends of justice would be met if instead of a maximum of life sentence, the appellants are punished with rigorous imprisonment for 10 years," the court concluded.&nbsp;

The court further noted that this conflict is not between the central government and Kejriwal but between ED and Kejriwal.

Arvind Kejriwal's arrest in liquor policy case valid: Delhi High Court

The court further noted that this conflict is not between the central government and Kejriwal but between ED and Kejriwal.

The Delhi High Court on April 9 dismissed Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's plea challenging his arrest in the liquor policy case. The court held that the arrest by the Enforcement Directorate in the case is valid.&nbsp;
The Aam Aadmi Party chief questioned the timing of the arrest but the court said that judges are bound by law and not by politics.&nbsp;
The court further noted that this is not conflict between the central government and Kejriwal but between ED and Kejriwal.
"The court is of the view that the arrest of Arvind Kejriwal was not in contravention of legal provisions. The remand can't be held to be illegal," said Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma while delivering the verdict.
Besides his arrest, Kejriwal, who is currently in judicial custody, also challenged his subsequent remand in ED custody in the case.
The matter pertains to alleged corruption and money laundering in formulating and executing the Delhi government's excise policy for 2021-22 that was later scrapped.
Kejriwal was arrested by the ED on March 21, hours after the high court refused to grant him protection from coercive action by the federal anti-money laundering agency.
He was sent to judicial custody in the case on April 1 after he was produced in the trial court on expiry of ED custody.
(With PTI inputs)

Akhoondji mosque, believed to be over 600 years old, was declared an illegal structure and demolished on January 30.

Delhi High Court refuses to allow Ramzan, Eid prayers at Akhoondji mosque site in Mehrauli

Akhoondji mosque, believed to be over 600 years old, was declared an illegal structure and demolished on January 30.

The Delhi High Court on Monday refused to allow offering of prayers during the month of Ramzan and on Eid at the demolished &lsquo;Akhoondji mosque&rsquo; site in Mehrauli.
A bench headed by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan directed that an appeal by Muntazmia Committee Madarsa Behrul Ulum and Kabarstan, challenging a single judge&rsquo;s order dismissing its plea seeking permission for devotees to access the mosque for Ramzan and Eid prayers, be listed along with a related matter on May 7.
The court observed that the single judge passed the order on the basis of another order refusing to allow prayers on the occasion of Shab-e-Barat, and a separate appeal challenging this order is coming up for hearing in May.
The counsel for the petitioner urged the court to pass an order, saying that the period of Ramzan as well as Eid would be over by then, but the bench, also comprising Justice Manmeet PS Arora, said no interim order can be passed in the matter at this stage, especially when the single judge had refused to grant the relief nearly a month ago.
&ldquo;Appeal will have to be heard along with that appeal. Impugned order is of March 11. You waited for so long to get your matter listed. Today, we are on April 8,&rdquo; the court remarked.
&ldquo;This will have to be heard along with that appeal on May 7. There can be no interim order,&rdquo; added the court.
The appellant&rsquo;s counsel said the committee was not trying to get any &ldquo;back-door entry&rdquo;. Relying on the Babri Masjid case and Gyanvapi case, he added that constitutional courts have earlier respected religious beliefs and permitted offering of prayers pending legal disputes in relation to shrines.
&ldquo;If Eid prayers are permitted for an hour, heavens will not fall&hellip;A message will go to the people of India, Muslims in particular, that courts are equally enthusiastic about protecting rights of Muslims,&rdquo; the lawyers argued.
On March 11, the single judge had refused to allow prayers during the month of Ramzan at the &lsquo;Akhoondji mosque&rsquo;, while noting that the high court had earlier refused to permit entry of devotees at the site on the occasion of Shab-e-Barat and there was no justification to take a different view.
The single judge had recorded that the land in question was now in the possession of the DDA and it has already passed an order for maintenance of status quo while dealing with the issue of legality of the demolition.
The appellant had urged the single judge bench to issue directions to allow unhindered entry into the site of Masjid Akhoondji to those who wanted to offer the Tarawih prayers during the month of Ramzan Shareef, beginning the sunset of March 11 till Eid-ul-Fitr.
The &lsquo;Akhoondji mosque&rsquo;, believed to be over 600 years old, as well as the Behrul Uloom madrasa there were declared as illegal structures in Sanjay Van and demolished by the DDA on January 30.

delhi high court

Categories