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.

This MP told Rajya Sabha he will miss Section 420, there's Bollywood link

Jethmalani said according to the new section, a person may be accused of sedition if he creates disaffection not against the government of the day but against the Indian State.&nbsp;

&nbsp;Senior advocate and nominated MP Mahesh Jethmalani told the Rajya Sabha on Thursday that he will miss some parts of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), especially section 420 that is imprinted in everyone's mind and became so popular that even a Hindi film titled "Shree 420" was made in the 1950s.
Participating in a debate on three criminal amendment bills in the Upper House of Parliament, Jethmalani said, "I have been in (the legal) practice for 42 years. Although the old must give way to the new, there are some parts of it we will miss, sir. Section 420 is imprinted in our minds." "It became part of Bollywood and there was a movie with Raj Kapoor called 'Shree 420'. Sometimes, we were admonished by our parents, who said 'charsaubeesi maat karo'. We will miss that. This bill must ring in changes for the new generation. It has and I welcome it," he added.

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam Bill seek to replace the Code of Criminal Procedure Act, the Indian Penal Code and the Indian Evidence Act.

Parliament Winter Session: Centre to withdraw 3 Bills on criminal laws, introduce them afresh

The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita Bill and Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam Bill seek to replace the Code of Criminal Procedure Act, the Indian Penal Code and the Indian Evidence Act.

The government has decided to withdraw the three bills that aim to replace existing criminal laws and introduce them afresh following various recommendations made by a parliamentary panel.
The three redrafted bills are expected to introduced in Parliament on Tuesday.
The Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha on August 11 along with Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam bills.
The three bills seek to replace the Code of Criminal Procedure Act, 1898, the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, respectively. &nbsp;Home Minister Amit Shah, in three identical signed statements submitted to Parliament, said the decision was taken after the parliamentary standing committee on home affairs made recommendations suggesting changes in the three bills following a series of discussions with domain experts and various stakeholders.
He said in the statement for withdrawal that to make comprehensive amendments to the Indian Penal Code, 1860, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023, was introduced in Lok Sabha on August 11 to repeal and replace the IPC.
This bill was referred to the department-related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs on August 18 for consideration.
Shah said the committee held several rounds of discussions with the officials of the Ministry of Home Affairs, Ministry of Law and Justice, domain experts and various stakeholders and submitted its reports along with its recommendations on November 10.
"Based on the recommendations of the committee, amendments are proposed in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023. It is proposed to introduce a new bill in place of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita Bill, 2023," he conveyed to the Parliament.
Two similar statements for withdrawal were also made regarding the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam.
Soon after the bills were introduced in Lok Sabha on August 11, Shah urged the Chair to send the bills to the standing committee for a threadbare discussion.
Subsequently, Rajya Sabha Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar referred the three proposed laws to the committee, which comes under the Rajya Sabha secretariat and asked it to submit its report within three months.
Also Watch: <a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/sc-verdict-on-article-370-full-statehood-to-j-k-would-be-restored-at-appropriate-time-amit-shah-1702313776397">SC verdict on Article 370| Full statehood to J-K would be restored at appropriate time: Amit Shah</a>

The Supreme Court on Tuesday will hear the plea filed by activist and an accused in the Bhima Koregaon-Elgar Parishad case seeking a permanent bail on medical grounds.

Bhima Koregaon case: SC lists Varavara Rao's plea for permanent medical bail on Tuesday 

One of the accused in the case, tribal rights activist Father Stan Swamy, who was suffering from similar ailments as the petitioner, passed away even before the trial could start in 2021.

The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to list a medical bail plea for hearing on Tuesday filed by activist and an accused in the Bhima Koregaon-Elgar Parishad case, P Varavara Rao, challenging the Bombay High Court order rejecting his prayer for permanent medical bail in the matter.&nbsp;
A bench headed by Justice U.U. Lalit responded to Solicitor General Tushar Mehta who requested that he be allowed to place on record a compilation of documents and the matter be heard tomorrow.&nbsp;
"Allow me to place it on record and have it tomorrow. His interim protection is till tomorrow," Mehta told the bench, also comprising Justices S R Bhat and Sudhanshu Dhulia.&nbsp;
Senior advocate Anand Grover, appearing for Rao, said he has no objection to this. "Can it be taken up today? I am ready, my friend is ready. We can finish it today," Grover said.&nbsp;
In his plea filed through advocate Nupur Kumar against the April 13 order of the high court, Rao has said, "The petitioner is an 83-year-old renowned Telugu poet and orator, who has undergone over two years of incarceration as an under-trial, and is currently enlarged on bail on medical grounds by the Bombay High Court respectfully submits that any further incarceration would ring the death knell for him as an advancing age and deteriorating health are a fatal combination".&nbsp;
The plea said Rao has challenged the high court order as he was not granted an extension of bail despite his advanced age and precarious health condition, and his prayer to shift to Hyderabad was also denied.&nbsp;
One of the accused in the case, tribal rights activist Father Stan Swamy, who was suffering from similar ailments as the petitioner, passed away even before the trial could start.
Also watch: <a href="https://www.editorji.com/story/father-stan-swamy-human-rights-defender-who-was-the-oldest-person-charged-with-terror-in-india-1625510328974">Father Stan Swamy: human rights defender who was the 'oldest person charged with terror in India' &nbsp;</a>
He was arrested on August 28, 2018 from his Hyderabad residence and is an under-trial in the Bhima Koregaon case for which an FIR was lodged by Pune police on January 8, 2018 under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA).&nbsp;
The case pertains to alleged inflammatory speeches made at the Elgar Parishad conclave held in Pune on December 31, 2017, which, the police claimed, triggered violence the next day near the Koregaon-Bhima war memorial located on the outskirts of the western Maharashtra city.&nbsp;
The Pune police had also claimed that the conclave was organised by people with alleged Maoist links. Later, the National Investigation Agency took over the probe in the matter.&nbsp;
Initially, Rao said he was put under house arrest pursuant to an order of the apex court and ultimately, on November 17, 2018, he was taken into police custody and later, shifted to the Taloja jail. On February 22, 2021, the Bombay High Court had granted him bail on medical grounds and he was released from jail on March 6, 2021. &nbsp; On April 13, the high court had rejected the plea but extended the time for the activist to surrender before the Taloja prison authorities by three months, to enable him to undergo cataract surgery. It had also dismissed Rao's application seeking that he be permitted to stay in Hyderabad instead of Mumbai, while out on bail.&nbsp;
With PTI inputs&nbsp;

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear on Friday the bail plea of Alt News co-founder Mohammed Zubair in connection with a case registered against him in Uttar Pradesh for allegedly outraging religious feelings. The court responded to Zubair's plea fo

Supreme Court to hear Alt News' Mohammed Zubair’s bail plea on Friday

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear on Friday the bail plea of Alt News co-founder Mohammed Zubair in connection with a case registered against him in Uttar Pradesh for allegedly outraging religious feelings. 

Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, who is representing Mohammed Zubair, told the Supreme Court on Thursday, that there is a threat to his life as people out there are threatening him, while urging the court to list the matter urgently.&nbsp;

The Supreme Court has agreed to hear on Friday the bail plea of Alt News co-founder Mohammed Zubair in connection with a case registered against him in Uttar Pradesh for allegedly outraging religious feelings. The court responded to Zubair's plea for an urgent hearing citing 'death threats' that he has been receiving.
The listing, however, awaits the Chief Justice of India's approval on Friday.
Senior Advocate Colin Gonsalves, who is representing Zubair,told the vacation bench of Justices Indira Banerjee and JK Maheshwari, which heard the plea on Thursday, that there is a threat to his life as people out there are threatening him, while urging the court to list the matter urgently.&nbsp;
The counsel said the Allahabad High Court had denied anticipatory bail to Zubair saying it was premature and he was arrested 2-3 days later.
On July 2, a Delhi court had denied him bail and had sent him to 14-days judicial custody.
An FIR was lodged against Zubair in Uttar Pradesh under IPC section 295A (deliberate and malicious act intended to outrage religious feelings) and section 67 of the IT Act on a complaint by Hindu Sher Sena Sitapur district president Bhagwan Sharan on June 1.
Zubair was arrested by the Delhi Police on June 27 for allegedly hurting religious sentiments through a tweet he had posted in 2018. The arrest was made following a complaint raised by a Twitter user&mdash;Hanuman Bhakt who said that a tweet posted by Zubair in 2018 of a movie poster that was released in 1983 had hurt religious sentiments of the followers of a Hindu deity.
The Delhi Police has has since then invoked new provisions&mdash;sections 120B (criminal conspiracy) and 201 (destruction of evidence) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and section 35 of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act&mdash;against Zubair.&nbsp;
With PTI inputs.

Forcibly kissing someone on the lips, and touching private parts are not unnatural offences under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. The Bombay High Court reportedly said this while granting bail to a man accused of sexually assaulting a 14-year-old boy.
The man was arrested last year after the boy's father filed a police complaint. The boy used to visit the accused man's shop in Mumbai for recharging an online game 'Ola Party', according to news agency PTI.
The boy claimed that one day when he visited the shop, he was forcibly kissed, and his private parts were touched. Subsequently, the man was booked under IPC Section 377, and some sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, or POCSO, Act.
IPC 377 pertains to "carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman, or animal". It carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
Bombay High Court's Justice Anuja Prabhudessai said that the element of unnatural sex was not prima facie applicable. The judge also said that a medical test conducted on the boy did not support his statement of sexual assault.

Kissing a boy forcibly on lips, touching private parts not 'unnatural offence' under IPC 377: Bombay HC

Kissing boy forcibly on lips, touching private parts not 'unnatural offence' under IPC 377, says Bombay HC while granting bail to accused.


Kissing boy forcibly on lips, touching private parts not 'unnatural offence' under IPC 377: Bombay HC

A 14-year-old boy had accused a shopkeeper of sexually assaulting him, following which the latter had been arrested.

Forcibly kissing someone on the lips, and touching private parts are not unnatural offences under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. The Bombay High Court reportedly said this while granting bail to a man accused of sexually assaulting a 14-year-old boy.
The man was arrested last year after the boy's father filed a police complaint. The boy used to visit the accused man's shop in Mumbai for recharging an online game 'Ola Party', according to news agency PTI.
The boy claimed that one day when he visited the shop, he was forcibly kissed, and his private parts were touched. Subsequently, the man was booked under IPC Section 377, and some sections of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences, or POCSO, Act.
IPC 377 pertains to "carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman, or animal". It carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
Bombay High Court's Justice Anuja Prabhudessai said that the element of unnatural sex was not prima facie applicable. The judge also said that a medical test conducted on the boy did not support his statement of sexual assault.

The debate on whether marital rape should be criminalised will see yet another chapter. The Delhi High Court delivered a split verdict on the question on May 11.
The two judges on the HC bench differed on whether husbands should be exempted from Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which pertains to rape. While Justice Rajiv Shakdher said that the exception for husbands should be struck down, Justice C Hari Shankar disagreed, stating that the exception was not unconstitutional, and based on intelligible differentia.
Petitioners had sought criminalisation of marital rape, claiming that the exemption under IPC discriminates against married women. Section 375 says that sexual acts by a man with his wife, who should not be a minor, is not rape.
The petitioners can approach the Supreme Court now.
In 2017, the Narendra Modi government had opposed the criminalisation of marital rape, claiming that such a move would destabilise the institution of marriage. However, in February 2022, the Central government sought more time to state its stand before the High Court, but the request was turned down.

What marital rape verdict means: Delhi High Court's split judgment on husband exemption in IPC 375

Marital rape judgment: the two judges on the Delhi HC bench differed on whether husbands should be exempted from Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which pertains to rape.

The debate on whether marital rape should be criminalised will see yet another chapter. The Delhi High Court delivered a split verdict on the question on May 11.
The two judges on the HC bench differed on whether husbands should be exempted from Section 375 of the Indian Penal Code, which pertains to rape. While Justice Rajiv Shakdher said that the exception for husbands should be struck down, Justice C Hari Shankar disagreed, stating that the exception was not unconstitutional, and based on intelligible differentia.
Petitioners had sought criminalisation of marital rape, claiming that the exemption under IPC discriminates against married women. Section 375 says that sexual acts by a man with his wife, who should not be a minor, is not rape.
ALSO WATCH:&nbsp;<a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/sex-determination-can-t-be-trivialised-delhi-hc-raps-jayeshbhai-jordaar-makers-1652109380861" target="_blank">Sex determination can't be trivialised: Delhi HC raps 'Jayeshbhai Jordaar' makers</a>
The petitioners can approach the Supreme Court now.
In 2017, the Narendra Modi government had opposed the criminalisation of marital rape, claiming that such a move would destabilise the institution of marriage. However, in February 2022, the Central government sought more time to state its stand before the High Court, but the request was turned down.

A monitor lizard allegedly raped by 4 men in Maharashtra in March. A cow allegedly raped by a man in Uttar Pradesh's Lucknow in April.
If you're sickened by these crimes, get ready to be shocked further. Between 2010 and 2020, 82 cases of sexual abuse of animals took place in India. This was claimed in a report by animal rights groups, including the Federation of Indian Animal Protection Organisations and All Creatures Great and Small.
The number could be even higher, since crimes against animals are not compiled by the National Crime Records Bureau, or NRCB, according to activists. Here are some other horrible cases which came to light in recent years.
In July 2018, activists claimed that a female dog in Goa's Siolim village had been brutalised with a screwdriver being pushed into its private parts. In the same month, the alleged rape of a pregnant goat in Haryana's Mewat grabbed headlines. The animal's owner claimed that 8 men had assaulted the goat, leading to its death.
More recently, in September last year, a 60-year-old was arrested in Rajasthan's Kota for allegedly raping a stray dog. A month later, a 67-year-old was accused of raping his neighbour's pet dog in Haryana's Gurugram, and the act was caught on camera.
Such crimes are covered by Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which refers to "carnal intercourse against the order of nature". The provision orders life imprisonment or 10-year-imprisonment with a monetary fine.
However, activists claim stricter laws and greater efforts by the government are needed to prevent animal abuse. A new law to replace the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960, a new ministry for animal welfare and protection, and compilation of animal-related crimes by the NCRB have been recommended by animal rights activists.

Humans raping animals: 80 cases in India in 10 years; what law says; what activists want

Humans 'raping' animals: 80 cases in India in 10 years; what law says; what activists want


&nbsp;
((MONITOR LIZARD VISUALS))
 A monitor lizard allegedly raped by 4 men in Maharashtra in March.
&nbsp;
 ((COW VISUALS))
 A cow allegedly raped by a man in Uttar Pradesh's Lucknow in April.
 If you're sickened by these crimes, get ready to be shocked further. Between 2010 and 2020, 82 cases of sexual abuse of animals took place in India. This was claimed in a report by animal rights groups, including the Federation of Indian Animal Protection Organisations and All Creatures Great and Small. The number could be even higher, since crimes against animals are not compiled by the National Crime Records Bureau, or NRCB, according to activists. Here are some other horrible cases which came to light in recent years.
&nbsp;
 ((GFX)) HEADER - NO LIMIT TO DEPRAVITY
 July 2018: dog allegedly raped with screwdriver in Goa's Siolim July 2018: pregnant goat allegedly raped by 8 men in Haryana's Mewat Sep 2021: 60-yr-old allegedly raped stray dog in Rajasthan's Kota Oct 2021: 67-yr-old allegedly raped neighbour's dog in Gurugram
&nbsp;
 VO ON GFX: In July 2018, activists claimed that a female dog&nbsp;in Goa's Siolim village&nbsp;had been brutalised with a screwdriver being pushed into its private parts. In the same month, the alleged rape of a pregnant goat in Haryana's Mewat grabbed headlines. The animal's owner claimed that 8 men had assaulted the goat, leading to its death. More recently, in September last year, a 60-year-old was arrested in Rajasthan's Kota for allegedly raping a stray dog. A month later, a 67-year-old was accused of raping his neighbour's pet dog in Haryana's Gurugram, and the act was caught on camera.
&nbsp;
 VO: Such crimes are covered by Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which refers to "carnal intercourse against the order of nature". The provision orders life imprisonment or 10-year-imprisonment with a monetary fine. However, activists claim stricter laws and greater efforts by the government are needed to prevent animal abuse.
&nbsp;
 ((GFX)) HEADER - ANIMAL ABUSE SUBHEADER - WHAT ACTIVISTS WANT
 New law to replace Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act Dedicated ministry for animal welfare, protection Compilation of animal-related crime data by NCRB
 VO ON GFX: A new law to replace the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960, a new ministry for animal welfare and protection, and compilation of animal-related crimes by the NCRB have been recommended by animal rights activists.
 =============================================
CAPTIONS Animal rape: rampant, unreported 80+ cases in India in 10 yrs: report NCRB doesn't cover crimes on animals Animal rape covered by IPC Sec 377 Activists want stricter laws, punishment

<div class="elementToProof">Between 2010 and 2020, 82 cases of sexual abuse of animals took place in India, as per&nbsp;the Federation of Indian Animal Protection Organisations and All Creatures Great and Small. </div>

A monitor lizard allegedly raped by 4 men in Maharashtra in March.&nbsp;A cow allegedly raped by a man in Uttar Pradesh's Lucknow in April.
If you're sickened by these crimes, get ready to be shocked further.&nbsp;Between 2010 and 2020, 82 cases of sexual abuse of animals took place in India.&nbsp;This was claimed in a report by animal rights groups, including the Federation of Indian Animal Protection Organisations and All Creatures Great and Small.
The number could be even higher, since crimes against animals are not compiled by the National Crime Records Bureau, or NRCB, according to activists.&nbsp;Here are some other horrible cases which came to light in recent years.
In July 2018, activists claimed that a female dog&nbsp;in Goa's Siolim village&nbsp;had been brutalised with a screwdriver being pushed into its private parts.&nbsp;In the same month, the alleged rape of a pregnant goat in Haryana's Mewat grabbed headlines. The animal's owner claimed that 8 men had assaulted the goat, leading to its death.
More recently, in September last year, a 60-year-old was arrested in Rajasthan's Kota for allegedly raping a stray dog.&nbsp;A month later, a 67-year-old was accused of raping his neighbour's pet dog in Haryana's Gurugram, and the act was caught on camera.
Such crimes are covered by Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, which refers to "carnal intercourse against the order of nature".&nbsp;The provision orders life imprisonment or 10-year-imprisonment with a monetary fine.
However, activists claim stricter laws and greater efforts by the government are needed to prevent animal abuse.&nbsp;A new law to replace the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act 1960, a new ministry for animal welfare and protection, and compilation of animal-related crimes by the NCRB have been recommended by animal rights activists.

A Delhi court on Thursday denied bail to former JNU student Umar Khalid in a case of larger conspiracy in connection with Delhi riots during February 2020.
Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat had reserved the order on March 3 after hearing arguments from the counsel appearing for Khalid and the prosecution.
During the arguments, the accused told the court that the prosecution lacked the evidence to prove it's case against him.
Khalid and several others have been booked under the anti-terror law UAPA in the case for being the "masterminds" of the February 2020 riots, which had left 53 people dead and over 700 injured.
The violence had erupted during the protests against the citisenship law CAA and the National Register of Citizens.
Besides Khalid, activist Khalid Saifi, JNU students Natasha Narwal and Devangana Kalita, Jamia Coordination Committee members Safoora Zargar, former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain and several others have also been booked under the stringent law in the case. PTI UK SA

Umar Khalid denied bail in the Delhi riots case

The former JNU student leader was denied bail in the 'larger conspiracy' case related to the riots in February 2020 that rocked northeast Delhi

Umar Khalid denied bail by a Delhi court

A Delhi court on Thursday denied bail to former JNU student Umar Khalid. He stands accused&nbsp;in a case of larger conspiracy in connection with Delhi riots during February 2020.
Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat had reserved the order on March 3 after hearing arguments from both sides. The verdict was pronounced after it was deferred several times.
During the arguments, Khalid's counsel&nbsp;told the court that the prosecution lacked the evidence to prove its case against him.&nbsp;
The lawyer submitted that "Delhi police has nothing but Republic TV and CNN-News18 for the case".
Khalid and several others have been booked under the anti-terror law UAPA&nbsp;for being the alleged "masterminds" of the February 2020 riots, which had left 53 people dead and over 700 injured.

The former JNU&nbsp;student leader was denied bail in the 'larger conspiracy' case related to the riots in February 2020 that rocked northeast Delhi

A Delhi court on Thursday denied bail to former JNU student Umar Khalid in a case of larger conspiracy in connection with Delhi riots during February 2020.
Additional Sessions Judge Amitabh Rawat had reserved the order on March 3 after hearing arguments from the counsel appearing for Khalid and the prosecution.
During the arguments, the accused told the court that the prosecution lacked the evidence to prove it's case against him.
Khalid and several others have been booked under the anti-terror law UAPA in the case for being the "masterminds" of the February 2020 riots, which had left 53 people dead and over 700 injured.
The violence had erupted during the protests against the citisenship law CAA and the National Register of Citizens.
Besides Khalid, activist Khalid Saifi, JNU students Natasha Narwal and Devangana Kalita, Jamia Coordination Committee members Safoora Zargar, former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain and several others have also been booked under the stringent law in the case. PTI UK SA

A panel originally set up for suggesting reforms in the Indian Penal Code (IPC) will now propose a separate section on &ldquo;offences relating to speech and expression&rdquo; and will attempt to define &ldquo;hate speech" according to an exclusive report by The Hindu.
The report says that there is no clear definition of what constitutes &ldquo;hate speech&rdquo; in the IPC. The Committee for Reforms in Criminal Laws, constituted by the Home Ministry, is attempting for the first time to define such speech. The committee is expected to submit its report soon. 
Earlier this month, observing that an extreme or harsh point of view would not amount to hate speech, the Bombay High Court quashed an FIR against a Navi Mumbai resident. The court said, the right to express one&rsquo;s views is a protected and cherished right in our democracy, just because the point of view of the petitioner is extreme or harsh will not make it a hate speech.
On April 30, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a plea challenging the legal validity of Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that deals with the offence of sedition.

Home Ministry panel to define hate speech, have IPC section on free speech

A Home Ministry panel set up for suggesting reforms to the IPC, will attempt to&nbsp;define 'hate speech', says a report by The Hindu

Home Ministry panel to define "hate speech", reports The Hindu
Panel originally set up for suggesting reforms in the IPC
IPC&nbsp;to have separate section on 'offences relating to speech'
So far, no clear definition of what constitutes 'hate speech'
Committee for Reforms in Criminal Laws to give report soon
Earlier, Bombay HC&nbsp;quashed an FIR against a Navi Mumbai resident
Court: extreme or harsh point of view can't amount to hate speech
Court: right to express one's views is a protected and cherished
SC to hear a plea challenging the legal validity of te sedition law

A panel originally set up for suggesting reforms in the Indian Penal Code (IPC) will now propose a separate section on &ldquo;offences relating to speech and expression&rdquo; and will attempt to define &ldquo;hate speech" according to an exclusive report by The Hindu.
The report says that there is no clear definition of what constitutes &ldquo;hate speech&rdquo; in the IPC. The Committee for Reforms in Criminal Laws, constituted by the Home Ministry, is attempting for the first time to define such speech. The committee is expected to submit its report soon. 
Earlier this month, observing that an extreme or harsh point of view would not amount to hate speech, the Bombay High Court quashed an FIR against a Navi Mumbai resident. The court said, the right to express one&rsquo;s views is a protected and cherished right in our democracy, just because the point of view of the petitioner is extreme or harsh will not make it a hate speech.
On April 30, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a plea challenging the legal validity of Section 124A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) that deals with the offence of sedition.

Student who accused Chinmayanand of rape turns hostile in court

The LLM student categorically denied in court that she had levelled any allegation against former Union minister Chinmayanand

A 23-year-old law student, who had last year accused former BJP MP Chinmayanand of rape, turned hostile at a hearing in a special court in Lucknow on Tuesday. The LLM student categorically denied that she had levelled any allegation against the former Union minister. The student now faces a perjury charge. 72-year-old Chinmayanand was arrested last year in the rape case, and was granted bail in February. Earlier in her statement to cops and then before a magistrate the woman had accused Chinmayanand&nbsp;of sexually abusing and threatening her.&nbsp;

Lucknow, PTI: In a courtroom twist Tuesday to the high-profile case, a law student who had accused former Union minister Chinmayanand of sexually exploiting her disowned her statements to police and now faces a perjury charge.
Appearing before an MP-MLA court in Lucknow, the LLM student categorically denied that she had levelled any allegation against the former Union minister as the prosecution had charged.
At this, the prosecution immediately moved an application under Section 340 of the CrPC, seeking action against her for perjury.
Judge P K Rai directed his office to register the application and asked the prosecution to furnish a copy of the application to the victim and the accused.
The court fixed October 15 for hearing on the application.
The Allahabad High Court in February this year granted bail to Chinmayanand, whose trust runs the Shahjahanpur law college where the woman studied. He was arrested in September last year.
The case was registered under Section 376-C of the IPC, an offence pertaining to the abuse of one's position by a person in authority to "induce or seduce" a woman under his charge to have "sexual intercourse not amounting to the offence of rape".
Chinmayanand (72) also faced charges under Sections 342 (wrongful confinement), 354-D (stalking) and 506 (criminal intimidation) of the IPC.
According to government lawyer Abhay Tripathi, the victim had lodged an FIR in this regard with the Lodhi Colony police station of New Delhi on September 5, 2019.
Her father lodged another complaint in Shahjahanpur and both FIRs were merged.
An SIT had recorded her statement. Later, her statement under Section 164 of the CrPC was recorded in Shahjahanpur.
In both statements, she had supported the FIR version but now during the trial, she changed her statement and denied the facts mentioned in the complaint.
&ldquo;Since she has turned hostile, I have moved an application under Section 340 of the CrPC,&rdquo; Tripathi said.
Earlier, the investigation officer had cited 33 witnesses and 29 documentary evidence in the 13-page charge sheet.
The Allahabad high court had on February 3, 2020 transferred the trial from Shahjahanpur to the Lucknow's MP-MLA court.
The case first came to light after the woman went missing on August 24, a day after she posted a video on social media alleging that a "senior leader of the sant community" was harassing and threatening to kill her.

UP: Trader who accused cop of extortion dies of gun shot

An Uttar Pradesh businessman, who had accused an IPS officer of extortion has died of gunshot injury in a Kanpur hospital. Indrakant Tripathi was found with a bullet wound in his neck on September 8

An Uttar Pradesh businessman, who had accused an IPS officer of extortion has died of gunshot injury in a Kanpur hospital. Indrakant Tripathi was found with a bullet wound in his neck on September 8 on a highway near the Mahoba town&nbsp; and had been battling for life in a critical care unit. Tripathi had earlier this month issued a video statement on social media, accusing the IPS officer,&nbsp;Manilal Patidar, of corruption, threats and intimidation. Patidar, the former police chief of Mahoba, which is a mining hub in the Bundelkhand region of the state, was then suspended over charges of corruption. Tripathi's family has demanded Patidar's arrest claiming that he can harm them as well.

Mahoba, PTI: A trader, who was shot at under mysterious circumstances, succumbed to injuries at a hospital in Uttar Pradesh's Kanpur on Sunday, a family member said.
Indrakant Tripathi, 44, had sustained a bullet injury on his neck during an attack on September 8.
His brother Ravikant said police have preserved the body for postmortem.
"He was undergoing medical treatment at a hospital in Kanpur. On Sunday, at around 7 pm, he succumbed to injuries," Ravikant told PTI.
A case of attempt to murder was registered against four people, including a suspended Superintendent of Police and an SHO, following a police complaint lodged by Ravikant, police had said on Saturday.
"Stone trader Indrakant Tripathi was injured after he was allegedly shot at under mysterious circumstances," Circle Officer Rajkumar Pandey had said on Saturday.
"On the police complaint lodged by Ravikant, a case has been registered against former SP Mani Lal Patidar, former SHO of Kabrai Police Station Devendra Shukla, Suresh Soni and Brahmadutt under various sections of the IPC, including attempt to murder (307) and Prevention of Corruption Act," he had said.
The FIR was registered on Friday and a probe into the matter was underway, Pandey said, refusing to elaborate further.
According to Ravikant, his brother was found injured in his car on the Banda-Kabrai road at around 2.30 pm on Tuesday.
He alleged that the suspended SP had demanded a bribe of Rs 6 lakh from his brother and threatened to kill him or send him to jail in case of non-payment.
"My brother uploaded a video on social media on September 7 and 8... after a few hours on Tuesday (September 8), he was found with a bullet injury," he said.
Ravikant Tripathi also claimed that his family is living in constant fear and not venturing out of their house.
On September 9, Patidar, the then Mahoba SP, was suspended with immediate effect by Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath on corruption charges.
The chief minister had also ordered a vigilance probe into the properties of Patidar.
Ballast transporters had accused the SP of demanding money from them for allowing the transportation of material.

ipc

Categories