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.

Social media influencer Jyoti Malhotra seeks bail amid espionage charges. Her connection with Pakistani intelligence operatives is under investigation. The court awaits further developments.

Jyoti Malhotra Espionage Bail Plea

Influencer Jyoti Malhotra seeks bail amid espionage allegations. Although not directly tied to military secrets, her interactions with Pakistani operatives are under court review.

Jyoti Malhotra, a social media influencer, seeks bail following espionage allegations. Not directly linked to military secrets, her communications with Pakistani operatives are under scrutiny. The court awaits police input by June 11.

Social media influencer Jyoti Malhotra, arrested on suspicion of espionage last month, on Tuesday sought regular bail from a local court, her lawyer said.
Malhotra moved a regular bail plea before Judicial Magistrate (First Class) Sunil Kumar through her lawyer Kumar Mukesh.
The court sought a reply from the police by June 11, he added.
On June 9, the court extended Malhotra's judicial custody and fixed her case's hearing on June 23.
The 33-year-old YouTuber had appeared before the court through video-conferencing.
Hisar Police arrested Malhotra on suspicion of espionage on May 16 and she was subsequently remanded to five days of police custody by the court.
Following the completion of the remand, the court extended the custody by four more days after the police sought to question her further.
On May 26, the court remanded her to judicial custody for 14 days.
Malhotra, who hails from the city, ran a YouTube channel "Travel with JO".
She was arrested at the New Aggarsain Extension and booked under provisions of the Official Secrets Act and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita.
Hisar Police previously said no evidence had emerged to indicate Malhotra had access to any military- or defence-related information but claimed she was in contact with some people, aware that they were Pakistani Intelligence Operatives (PIO).
Police sources had previously said she was in touch with Ehsan-ur-Rahim alias Danish, a staffer at the Pakistani High Commission, since November 2023.
India expelled Danish on May 13 for allegedly indulging in espionage.
The police have claimed Pakistani intelligence operatives were developing Malhotra as an asset.

'Entirely misconceived': SC quashes plea seeking a complete ban on BBC from operating in India

'Entirely misconceived': SC quashes plea seeking complete ban on BBC from operating in India

"The writ petition is entirely misconceived and has no merit and is accordingly dismissed," the bench said.

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a plea seeking to impose a complete ban on the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) in India, saying it is "entirely misconceived".
A bench comprising Justices Sanjiv Khanna and M M Sundresh passed the order while hearing a plea filed by Vishnu Gupta, president of the Hindu Sena, and Beerendra Kumar Singh, a farmer.
"The writ petition is entirely misconceived and has no merit and is accordingly dismissed," the bench said.
Alleging that the BBC has been biased against India and the Indian government, the plea alleged that its documentary on Prime Minister Narendra Modi is a "result of deep conspiracy against global rise of India and its prime minister".
"The documentary film by BBC relating to Gujarat violence 2002 implicating Prime Minister Narendra Modi is not only reflective of anti-Narendra Modi cold propaganda broadcast to tarnish his image alone but this is anti-Hinduism propaganda by the BBC to destroy the social fabric of India," the plea had alleged.
On February 3, the apex court had sought responses from the Centre and others on the separate petitions challenging its decision to block the documentary.
The pleas, on which notice was issued by the top court, have been filed by veteran journalist N Ram, Trinamool Congress MP Mahua Moitra, activist lawyer Prashant Bhushan and lawyer M L Sharma.
The top court had on February 3 also directed the central government to produce original records relating to its decision to block the BBC documentary.
On January 21, the government had issued directions for blocking multiple YouTube videos and Twitter posts sharing links to the controversial documentary.

SC to hear plea against appointment of woman lawyer as Madras HC judge

SC to hear plea challenging appointment of lawyer Victoria Gowri as Madras HC judge

SC to hear plea challenging appointment of woman lawyer as Madras HC judge

The proposal to elevate the woman lawyer, who has been representing the Centre before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, has been mired in controversy after reports emerged about her alleged affiliation to the BJP.

In a significant development, the Supreme Court on Monday advanced to February 7 the hearing on a plea challenging the appointment of lawyer Lekshmana Chandra Victoria Gowri as a judge of the Madras High Court, soon after the Centre notified her judgeship.
The apex court had earlier in the day agreed to hear on February 10 the petition against her elevation but the matter was mentioned again and the hearing was fixed for Tuesday by a bench headed by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud which said the collegium has taken note of &ldquo;certain developments&rdquo; after her name was recommended to the Centre.
During the second mention, the bench was apprised by senior advocate Raju Ramachandran that the Centre has notified the appointment of Gowri as an additional judge of the Madras High Court and urged for urgent intervention.
The proposal to elevate the woman lawyer, who has been representing the Centre before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, has been mired in controversy after reports emerged about her alleged affiliation to the BJP.
Also Watch: <a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/sc-judges-appointment-centre-clears-name-of-5-judges-to-top-court-1675515644374">Centre clears names of 5 judges to Supreme Court</a>

Benami law: Centre moves SC with an 'unusual request' over review on verdict

Except for death penalty cases, the review pleas are usually decided by judges concerned in chambers by circulation.

The Centre on Tuesday sought from the Supreme Court an open court hearing on its plea seeking review of the judgement by which several provisions of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 were struck down.
A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justice P S Narasimha was urged by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, that the review plea be heard in open court keeping in mind the importance of the issue.
&ldquo;This is an unusual request. We seek an open court hearing of the review. Due to this judgement, a lot of orders are being passed even though some of the provisions of the Benami Act were not even under challenge. Like the retrospectivity could not have been looked into (by the SC bench),&rdquo; the top law officer said.
&ldquo;We will consider it,&rdquo; the CJI said.
Except death penalty cases, the review pleas are usually decided by judges concerned in chambers by circulation.
The top court, on August 23 last year, had struck down some provisions of the Benami law.
Also Watch: <a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/politics/then-what-s-purpose-of-elected-govt-supreme-court-grills-centre-on-power-tussle-with-delhi-govt-1673595800648">'Then, what's the purpose of elected govt?': Supreme Court grills Centre on power tussle with Delhi govt</a>

SC dismisses Bilkis Bano’s review petition challenging early release of 11 convicts

SC dismisses Bilkil Bano&rsquo;s review petition challenging early release of 11 convicts

Bano was gang-raped and seven members of her family were killed during the 2002 Gujarat riots.

The Supreme Court has dismissed a plea filed by Bilkis Bano, seeking a review of its earlier order by which it had asked the Gujarat government to consider the petitions for remission of sentences of 11 convicts in the gang-rape case.
Bano was gang-raped and seven members of her family were killed during the 2002 Gujarat riots.
According to procedures, review pleas against apex court judgments are decided in chambers by circulation by the judges who were part of the judgment under review.
The review plea came up for in-chamber consideration on December 13 before a bench of justices Ajay Rastogi and Vikram Nath.
ALSO WATCH: <a title="'Repeated requests very irritating': SC while refusing urgent listing of Bilkis Bano" href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/repeated-requests-very-irritating-sc-while-refusing-urgent-listing-of-bilkis-bano-1671020167884">'Repeated requests very irritating': SC while refusing urgent listing of Bilkis Bano</a>
"I am directed to inform you that the review petition above mentioned filed in Supreme Court was dismissed by the court on December 13, 2022," read a communication sent to Bano's counsel Shobha Gupta by the apex court's assistant registrar.
The gang-rape survivor had sought a review of the top court's May 13 order on a plea moved by a convict.
The top court had asked the state government to consider the plea for a premature release of the convicts in terms of its policy of July 9, 1992 about deciding a remission petition within a period of two months.
All the 11 convicts were granted remission by the Gujarat government and released on August 15.

SC dismisses plea seeking to disclose details of Collegium meeting under RTI Act 

"Collegium is a multi-member body whose tentative decision cannot be brought in the public domain," it said.

The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a petition seeking details for the SC collegium's meeting held on December 12, 2018.
The plea was filed under the Right to Information Act.
The apex court in its observation said that SC collegium's discussion cannot be disclosed to the public and that only the final decision of the Collegium need to be uploaded in the website.
The petition was filed by RTI Activist Anjali Bharadwaj.
ALSO WATCH: <a title="Not here to reopen history: SC junks PIL on Taj Mahal" href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/not-here-to-reopen-history-sc-junks-pil-on-taj-mahal-1670239897512">Not here to reopen history: SC junks PIL on Taj Mahal</a>
A bench of Justices MR Shah and CT Ravikumar said that only resolutions drawn and signed by all collegium members can be said to be a final decision. Tentative resolutions drawn upon discussion and consultation among the members cannot be said to be final unless they are signed by all of them, it said.
"Collegium is a multi-member body whose tentative decision cannot be brought in the public domain," it said.
The top court said it cannot place reliance on media reports and the interview of a former member of the collegium and doesn't want to comment on statements made by the former judge.

SC directs Centre, states to file responses on plea seeking directions for uniform healthcare standard

Plea on uniform healthcare standard: SC directs Centre, states to file responses

The plea also sought directions from the top court for a uniform standard of healthcare for citizens in line with the Clinical Establishments Act, 2010

&nbsp;The Supreme Court Friday directed the Centre and the states to file their responses on a plea seeking directions for a uniform standard of healthcare for citizens in line with the Constitution by adopting provisions of the Clinical Establishments Act, 2010.
A bench of Justices B R Gavai and Vikram Nath granted four weeks to the Union of India and the state governments to file their replies.
The top court was hearing a plea filed by Jan Swasthya Abhiyan, Patients' Rights Campaign and K M Gopakumar which had also sought directions for operationalising all the provisions of the Act, as well as Clinical Establishment Rules, 2012 in order to ensure affordable and quality healthcare.
Also watch: <a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/cannot-hold-govt-liable-for-deaths-due-to-covid-vaccine-side-effects-centre-to-supreme-court-1669702054736">Cannot hold govt liable for deaths due to Covid vaccine side-effects: Centre to Supreme Court</a>
The plea had sought directions for notification and implementation of the conditions for registration of clinical establishments such as observance of minimum standards, display of rates for procedures and services, compliance with the standard treatment protocol, as provided in Sections 11 and 12 of the CEA read with Rule 9 of the Rules, 2012.
The petition had also sought directions that a grievance redressal mechanism be created for the patients at the district, state and national level national level till the lacunae in the CEA are filled by a suitable legislation.
The PIL said the duty to provide healthcare to citizens was put on the government under Article 47 of the Constitution; however, the public healthcare system did not proceed as conceived and treats only 30 per cent of the patients, while the rest are treated by the private sector.
The petition contended that the public healthcare system suffers from a lack of public health infrastructure and human resources, non-availability of medicines, lack of public investment and forced dependency on the private sector.
The plea had submitted that there is an urgent need to develop the public healthcare system in India by providing proper infrastructure and sufficient budget to ensure that the maximum facilities exist in the public domain, not only in normal times but also at the time of emergencies such as Covid-19.

Rehabilitation of Kashmiri Pandits: SC asks petitioner to make representation before Centre

The plea had also sought directions to conduct a census of Hindus and Sikhs, who have been victims or survivors of targeted killings in Jammu and Kashmir in the 1990s.&nbsp;

The Supreme Court on Friday asked an NGO to withdraw their plea seeking the rehabilitation of Kashmiri Pandits and Sikhs in the valley who left their homes and migrated during 1989-2003.&nbsp;
The plea was heard by a bench of Justices B R Gavai and C T Ravikumar.
The top court asked the NGO &lsquo;We the Citizens&rsquo; to make a representation to the Centre government in the matter. The NGO had sought the constitution of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate the targeted killings in Kashmir valley that had triggered the migration.&nbsp;
"It is purely in the domain of the executive. You approach the government.", the court directed the NGO. The plea had also sought directions to conduct a census of Hindus and Sikhs who have been victims or survivors of the targeted killings and are now residing in different parts of India.&nbsp;
While the provisions of Article 370 granted special autonomous status to Jammu and Kashmir, Article 35-A provided special rights and privileges to natives of the erstwhile state.
ALSO WATCH: <a href="https://www.editorji.com/india-news/local/terrorists-attack-non-kashmiri-labourer-in-j-k-s-pulwama-muneerul-islam-from-bengal-hospitalised-1662099676391" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Terrorists attack non-Kashmiri labourer in J&amp;K's Pulwama; Muneerul Islam from Bengal hospitalised</a>
&nbsp;

plea

Categories