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 Supreme Court of India refused to hear a plea seeking removal of remarks from an NCERT textbook, stating that criticism of judicial decisions is a democratic right. The Centre also informed about an expert panel to review the content.

'People have the right to criticise judgments,' says Supreme Court

The Supreme Court of India refused to hear a plea seeking removal of remarks from an NCERT textbook, stating that criticism of judicial decisions is a democratic right. The Centre also informed about an expert panel to review the content.

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a plea seeking removal of a remark against its verdicts from NCERT's old class 8 Social Science textbook, saying that people have a right to criticise them.
The Centre, meanwhile, informed a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi that it had constituted an expert committee comprising two former apex court judges and an ex-attorney general to review the NCERT book with a chapter on corruption in the judiciary.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the bench that the committee comprises senior advocate and former Attorney General KK Venugopal, former top court judge Justice Indu Malhotra, and former Supreme Court judge and current National Judicial Academy director Justice Aniruddha Bose, along with a vice chancellor.
"We have formed the committee to draft the chapter. Mr KK Venugopal will be a member of the committee. Justice Indu Malhotra will also be a part. We have also requested Justice Aniruddha Bose from the National Judicial Academy to be there," Mehta said.
The top court was hearing a petition by former NCERT member Pankaj Pushkar against a passage in an older class 8 textbook that read, "recent judgments tend to view the slum dweller as an encroacher in the city."
The court refused to entertain the petition, observing that the judiciary should not be oversensitive about healthy criticism.
"It's a viewpoint about a judgment. That's a healthy criticism. Why the judiciary should be so oversensitive about that. This part of the book points out what is the structure of the judiciary, how they work, what they have done, some good has also been highlighted.
"Then they say, however, there are also court judgments that people believe work against the best interests of common persons. This is a viewpoint about a judgment, people have a right to criticise our judgments," the CJI observed orally.

Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan expressed regret over the NCERT Class 8 chapter on judicial corruption and assured accountability, saying action will be taken against those responsible.

Will fix accountability, take action against those involved: Education minister on NCERT row

Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan expressed regret over the NCERT Class 8 chapter on judicial corruption and assured accountability, saying action will be taken against those responsible.

Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan on Thursday expressed anguish over NCERT coming up with a chapter on judicial corruption in its Class 8 textbook, while promising to fix accountability and take action against those involved in drafting the controversial portion.
He also underlined that the government has full respect for the judiciary and has no intent of disrespecting the institution.
The remarks came on a day the Supreme Court observed that there appeared to be a "well-orchestrated conspiracy" to defame the judiciary and imposed a "complete blanket ban" on the Class 8 NCERT book and ordered that all copies, physical and digital, be seized.
"They have fired the gunshot. The judiciary is bleeding," a bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant said, a day after the National Council of Educational Research and Training apologised for "inappropriate content" in the social science textbook, and said it would be rewritten in consultation with appropriate authorities.
The bench, also comprising Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, issued show cause notices to the NCERT director and the secretary of the department of school education and asked them to explain why contempt proceedings should not be initiated against those responsible.
Reacting to the development, Pradhan said, "I am very sad at what has happened and express regret... There was no intention to insult the judiciary. An inquiry will be conducted and accountability fixed. Action will be taken against those involved in drafting the chapter. As soon as we got to know (about it), the circulation of the textbooks was put on hold."
"In a democratic country like India, the judiciary is supreme and we have utmost respect for it. We have taken the issue very seriously. The court's directives will be complied with," he told reporters in Jamshedpur.
Pradhan was in Jamshedpur to take part in a ceremony where President Droupadi Murmu laid the foundation stone for a Jagannath spiritual centre.
The National Council of Educational Research and Training (NCERT) social science textbook for Class 8 in question states that corruption, a massive backlog of cases, and the lack of an adequate number of judges are among the challenges faced by the judicial system.
After stern words by the Supreme Court that it will not allow "anyone on earth" to tarnish the judiciary's integrity, the NCERT pulled the textbook from its website, with sources saying the government was livid with the controversial references in the curriculum.
The NCERT on Wednesday also apologised for "inappropriate content" after facing the Supreme Court's ire over the chapter and said the book will be rewritten in consultation with appropriate authorities.

The Supreme Court imposed a blanket ban on the Class 8 NCERT book chapter referring to judicial corruption, ordering immediate seizure of physical copies and removal from digital platforms.

Supreme Court Bans NCERT Textbook Critical of Judiciary

Supreme Court Halts NCERT Textbook on Judiciary

The Supreme Court imposed a blanket ban on the Class 8 NCERT book chapter referring to judicial corruption, ordering immediate seizure of physical copies and removal from digital platforms.

The Supreme Court on Thursday imposed a "complete blanket ban" on any further publication, reprinting or digital dissemination of NCERT's Class 8 social science book as it contains "offending" contents on corruption in the judiciary, saying they have fired a gunshot and the judiciary is "bleeding".
Observing that there appeared to be a "deep-rooted conspiracy" and "calculated move" to undermine the institution and demean the dignity of judiciary, the apex court directed that all copies of the book - physical and digital - currently in circulation be immediately seized and removed from public access without any delay.
A bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant issued show cause notices to the NCERT director and the secretary of the department of school education asking them to explain why suitable action, including that of contempt, be not initiated against those found responsible for introducing the "offending" chapter.
"As an abundant precaution, a complete blanket ban is hereby imposed on any further publication, reprinting or digital dissemination of the book titled 'Exploring Society: India and Beyond' (Vol II)," the bench, which also comprised justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi, said.
The bench warned that any attempt to circumvent its order through electronic medium or alternative titles containing the same content shall be treated as a direct interference, willful breach and defiance of its directions.
"They have fired a gunshot. The judiciary is bleeding," a visibly irked CJI said during the hearing in a suo motu matter over the book.
"It is my duty as the head of the institution to find out who is responsible; heads must roll," the CJI said, adding, "We would like to have a deeper probe."
The bench said it was "nearly shocked" when one of the newspapers published an article regarding release of the social science textbook having the chapter.
It said after media report was published, the apex court's secretary general was asked to verify whether such a publication was released by NCERT.
"Instead of having an introspection of what had been written in the book in the most reckless, irresponsible, contemptuous and motivated manner, the director (of NCERT) responded in writing defending the contents of the book," the bench said.
It said on a prima facie examination of the book's content and read in conjunction with the administrative response received from director, it seemed "there is a calculated move to undermine the institutional authority and demean the dignity of the judiciary".
It said if allowed to go unchecked, it would erode the sanctity of judicial office and the estimation of public at large and more importantly, within the impressionable minds of youth.
The bench observed the narrative contained in book chooses not to dwell into any of the transformative initiatives and measures pioneered by court, including towards streamlining the ease of access to justice, and the substantive contribution made by judiciary towards the preservation of democratic fabric.
"This silence is particularly egregious given the sheer volume of high-ranking officials who have been censured by this very court in the past for corrupt practices, fraudulent activities and siphoning of public funds etc," it said.
The bench said choice of words and expressions in the book might never be a simpliciter inadvertance or bona fide error.
"We may, however, hasten to add that we do not propose to initiate the suo motu proceedings to stifle any legitimate critique or with a view to stop any individual or organisation from exercising their right to scrutinise public institutions, including the judiciary," it said.
"Given the serious consequences and an everlasting adverse impact on the independence and autonomy of judiciary, such a misconduct would fall within the definition of criminal contempt under section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971...," it said.
It said if found to be a deliberate move, it will undoubtedly amount to interfering with the administration of justice besides scandalising the institution.
The bench asked the director of NCERT to produce the original records of minutes of meetings where the offending chapter was deliberated and finalised, and the names and credentials of textbook development team responsible for drafting the chapter.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta tendered an unconditional and unqualified apology on behalf of the department of school education.
Mehta said the two individuals who prepared the chapter would never be associated with any activity of the ministry.
"There are 32 books which went in the market and which are being withdrawn. Rest of the books we are not circulating. The entire chapter would be re-visited by a new team," the top law officer said, adding, "We can't teach our class 8 students that justice is being denied in the country."
The bench posted the matter for further hearing on March 11.
The National Council of Educational Research &amp; Training apologised on Wednesday for "inappropriate content" in the social science textbook and said it would be rewritten in consultation with appropriate authorities.
A section titled "Corruption in the Judiciary" in the new textbook says corruption, a massive backlog of cases, and the lack of an adequate number of judges are among the challenges faced by the judicial system.
It also states that judges are bound by a code of conduct that governs not only their behaviour in court, but also how they conduct themselves outside it.

NCERT has withdrawn its Class 8 social science textbook from its website after the Supreme Court objected to references on judicial corruption in a chapter.

NCERT pulls chapter on 'judicial corruption' after CJI rebuke

NCERT has withdrawn its Class 8 social science textbook from its website after the Supreme Court objected to references on judicial corruption in a chapter.

Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Wednesday strongly objected to a chapter on judicial corruption in the NCERT's Class 8 social science curriculum, prompting the syllabus-setting body to withdraw the contentious textbook from its website.
A three-judge bench comprising the CJI and justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi took suo motu cognizance of the "objectionable" statements about the judiciary in the new textbook after senior advocate Kapil Sibal, alongside Abhishek Singhvi, mentioned the matter for urgent consideration.
The NCERT (National Council of Educational Research and Training) social science textbook for Class 8 says corruption, a massive backlog of cases, and the lack of an adequate number of judges are among the challenges faced by the judicial system.
After stern words by the Supreme Court that it will not allow "anyone on earth" to tarnish the judiciary's integrity, the NCERT pulled the textbook from its website, with sources saying the government was livid with the controversial references in the curriculum.
The council, responsible for school education curriculum, is also considering the removal of the controversial portions from the books already printed, sources said. Several schools in the national capital, however, said they had no directive yet about whether or not to teach the portions in question.
The NCERT is said to have called an internal meeting to review the recommendations of the subject experts involved in the chapter and the officials who approved it.
NCERT Chairman Dinesh Prasad Saklani did not respond to calls and messages on the issue. Another top official at the council refused to comment, saying the matter was sub judice.
The government sources said while the NCERT is an autonomous body, the officials responsible for adding chapters should have applied their minds. If the issue of corruption was to be included in the textbook, it should have been about all three organs (the executive, the legislature and the judiciary), they said.
"We are very disturbed as members of this institution to find that children of Class 8 are being taught about corruption in the judiciary. It is part of the NCERT book. We have great stake in the institution&hellip; it (the chapter) is entirely scandalous. We have the copies of the book," Sibal said in court.
&ldquo;I can assure you all that I am fully aware of this,&rdquo; the CJI said, adding that he received various calls and messages and many high court judges were "perturbed".
When Sibal said he hoped the bench would take suo motu cognizance, the CJI said, &ldquo;Wait for a day. This is definitely concerning the entire institution. The bar and the bench are perturbed. Every stakeholder in the system is really perturbed. I am receiving a lot of calls and messages. There are judges of the high courts who are perturbed.&rdquo; The CJI told Sibal he had already passed an order taking suo motu cognizance of the issue.
&ldquo;I will not allow anyone on earth to taint the integrity of the institution and defame the institution. At any cost, I will not permit it. Howsoever high it may be, the law will take its course. I know how to deal with it," a visibly irked CJI said.
Singhvi raised the issue of the NCERT adopting a selective approach and said it presumed that &ldquo;there was no corruption elsewhere. There was not a word about corruption in bureaucracy, politics, public life and other institutions&rdquo;.
"It seems to be a very calculated and deep-rooted measure to... we don't want to say anything more... I am aware and I have done my duty," the CJI said and thanked the lawyers for raising the issue.
Justice Bagchi referred to the basic structure doctrine and said "constitutional integrity to the basic structure is missing in the contents of the textbook".
The book pegs the approximate number of pending cases in the Supreme Court at 81,000, in high courts at 62.40 lakh, and in district and subordinate courts at 4.70 crore.
It highlights the judiciary's internal accountability mechanisms and refers to the established procedure for receiving complaints through the Centralised Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System.
According to the book, over 1,600 complaints were received through this mechanism between 2017 and 2021.
The textbook also quotes former Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, who in July 2025 said that instances of corruption and misconduct within the judiciary had a negative impact on public confidence.
"However, the path to rebuilding this trust lies in the swift, decisive and transparent action taken to address and resolve these issues... Transparency and accountability are democratic virtues," he is quoted as saying in the book.
The government sources said that data on corruption in the judiciary was available in parliamentary records and the national judicial data grid, but the Union Law Ministry was not consulted for cross-verification of the fact.
The sources also said former CJI Gavai's quote on corruption in the judiciary was taken out of context, and he is learnt to be unhappy over it.
"If students are to be taught about corruption, the chapter should have ideally encouraged them to file a graft complaint, but not single out one institution."
An in-house mechanism already exists in the Supreme Court and the 25 high courts to deal with complaints of corruption against judges. As per the drafters of the constitution, the judiciary is an independent institution which is capable of dealing with such cases," a government functionary said.
Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal told the Lok Sabha earlier this month that 8,639 complaints were received against sitting judges between 2016 and 2025. The highest number of complaints (1,170) was received in 2024 by the office of the CJI against sitting judges.
Former law minister Ashwani Kumar hailed CJI Surya Kant for taking suo motu cognisance of the chapter and said the prompt action would help bury the propaganda against the judiciary.

The government is considering removing references to judicial corruption from the Class 8 NCERT social science textbook after the Supreme Court took suo motu cognisance of the issue.

NCERT may remove controversial portion on judiciary from class 8 textbook, say sources

The government is considering removing references to judicial corruption from the Class 8 NCERT social science textbook after the Supreme Court took suo motu cognisance of the issue.

The controversial portions about judicial corruption in NCERT's class 8 textbook could be removed as the government has not taken kindly to the matter, sources said on Wednesday, while the council pulled the book from its website.
A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi has taken suo motu cognisance of the "objectionable" statements about the judiciary in NCERT textbooks after senior advocate Kapil Sibal, alongside Abhishek Singhvi, mentioned the matter for urgent consideration.
Separately, CJI Kant strongly objected to a chapter on judicial corruption in the NCERT's Class 8 curriculum, saying nobody on earth will be allowed to defame the judiciary and taint its integrity.
The National Council of Educational Research and Training's (NCERT's) new social science textbooks for Class 8 say corruption, a massive backlog of cases, and the lack of an adequate number of judges are among the challenges faced by the judicial system.
Meanwhile, the NCERT is said to have called an internal meeting to review the recommendations of the subject experts involved in the chapter and the officials who approved it.
NCERT Chairman Dinesh Prasad Saklani did not respond to calls and messages on the issue. Another top official at the council refused to comment, saying the matter is sub judice now.
The government sources said that while NCERT is an autonomous body, officials responsible for adding chapters should have applied their minds. If the issue of corruption was to be included in the textbook, it should have been related to all three organs -- the executive, judiciary and the legislature, they said.
The book pegs the approximate number of pending cases in the Supreme Court at 81,000, in high courts at 62.40 lakh, and district and subordinate courts at 4.70 crore.
It highlights the judiciary's internal accountability mechanisms and refers to the established procedure for receiving complaints through the Centralised Public Grievance Redress and Monitoring System (CPGRAMS).
According to the book, over 1,600 complaints were received through this mechanism between 2017 and 2021.
The textbook also quotes former Chief Justice of India B R Gavai, who in July 2025 said that instances of corruption and misconduct within the judiciary had a negative impact on public confidence.
"However, the path to rebuilding this trust lies in the swift, decisive and transparent action taken to address and resolve these issues... Transparency and accountability are democratic virtues," he is quoted as saying in the book.
The government sources said that data on corruption in the judiciary is available in parliamentary records and the national judicial data grid, but the Union Law Ministry was not consulted for cross verification of the fact.
The sources also said former CJI Gavai's quote on corruption in the judiciary was taken out of context, and he is learnt to be unhappy over it.
"If students are to be taught about corruption, the chapter should have ideally encouraged them to file a graft complaint, but not single out one institution. An in-house mechanism already exists in the Supreme Court and the 25 high courts to deal with complaints of corruption against judges. As per the drafters of the constitution, the judiciary is an independent institution which is capable of dealing with such cases," a government functionary said.
Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal had told the Lok Sabha earlier this month that 8,639 complaints have been received against sitting judges between 2016 and 2025. The highest number of complaints (1,170) was received in 2024 by the office of the CJI against sitting judges.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday took suo motu cognisance of references to corruption in the judiciary in a Class 8 NCERT social science textbook, terming the issue a matter of grave concern.

SC takes cognisance of NCERT class 8 chapter on corruption in judiciary

The Supreme Court on Wednesday took suo motu cognisance of references to corruption in the judiciary in a Class 8 NCERT social science textbook, terming the issue a matter of grave concern.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday took suo motu cognisance of the contents of the class 8 NCERT textbook referring to corruption in the judiciary and termed it a matter of "grave concern."
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi was urged by senior advocate Kapil Sibal that "children of class 8 are taught about corruption in the judiciary. This is a matter of grave concern."
The CJI said, "I will not allow anybody to defame the institution. Law will take its course."
He added, "As head of the institution, I have done my duty and have taken cognisance &hellip; This seems to be a calculated move. I won't say much."
Justice Bagchi said the book seemed to be against the basic structure of the Constitution.
The CJI said, "Please wait for a few days. Bar and Bench all are perturbed. All high court judges are perturbed. I will take up the matter suo motu. I will not allow anybody to defame the institution. Law will take its course."
Later, Justice Kant said that the top court has taken suo motu cognisance of the matter.
Corruption, massive backlog of cases, and lack of an adequate number of judges are among the "challenges" faced by the judicial system, according to the new social science NCERT textbook for class 8.
The section "corruption in the judiciary" in the new book states that judges are bound by a code of conduct that governs not only their behaviour in court, but also how they conduct themselves outside it.

The Supreme Court ordered serving and former district judges to assist the Election Commission in West Bengal’s special intensive revision of electoral rolls, amid disputes between the poll panel and the state government.

SC orders deployment of judicial officers in Bengal's SIR exercise

The Supreme Court ordered serving and former district judges to assist the Election Commission in West Bengal&rsquo;s special intensive revision of electoral rolls, amid disputes between the poll panel and the state government.

In an extraordinary order, the Supreme Court on Friday directed deployment of serving and former district judges to assist the Election Commission in the controversy-ridden special intensive revision of electoral rolls in West Bengal.
Ruing the "unfortunate blame game" between the EC and the TMC-led government, a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi passed a slew of fresh directions to ensure completion of the special intensive revision (SIR) process in the state.
The bench ordered deputation of judicial officers for adjudication of claims and objections of persons put under logical discrepancy list.
It asked the Calcutta High Court chief justice to spare judicial officers and find former judges to assist in SIR work as it took serious note of state government not sparing enough grade 'A' officers for the revision exercise.
The top court permitted the EC to publish a draft list of voters in the state by February 28 while allowing the poll panel to also issue supplementary lists later.
The bench directed district collectors and SPs of the state to provide logistical support and security to the judicial officers deputed for the ongoing SIR work while making it clear that orders passed by judicial officers will be deemed as orders of court.
It said judicial officers will be assisted by micro-observers and state government officials in the SIR process.
The top court also directed the Calcutta High Court Chief Justice to hold a meeting by Saturday of all the stakeholders including the chief secretary, DGP and an official from the EC.
Logical discrepancies in progeny linking with the 2002 voter list include instances of a mismatch in the parent's name and the age difference between a voter and their parent being less than 15 years or more than 50 years.

The Supreme Court granted bail to Ashpak Basha Makandar in the 2024 Pune Porsche accident case on grounds of parity, noting he had been in jail for 20 months while other co-accused had already secured relief.

SC grants bail to accused in 2024 Pune Porsche accident case

The Supreme Court granted bail to Ashpak Basha Makandar in the 2024 Pune Porsche accident case on grounds of parity, noting he had been in jail for 20 months while other co-accused had already secured relief.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday granted bail to an accused in the 2024 Pune Porsche accident case on grounds of parity.
The case relates to a May 19, 2024, incident in which a Porsche car allegedly driven by a 17-year-old boy under the influence of alcohol, fatally knocked down two IT professionals in Pune's Kalyani Nagar area.
A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan noted that Ashpak Basha Makandar had been in jail since 20 months while three other accused have already been granted bail.
It was alleged that Makandar facilitated the criminal conspiracy to tamper with medical evidence by swapping of blood samples of the minor occupants with those of their guardians at the hospital.
"Senior counsel appearing for the appellant submitted that the appellant is similarly placed to the co-accused who has already been granted bail in this matter. Bail granted in terms of the order passed," the bench said.
The top court on February 2 had granted bail to three accused in the case while observing that parents are to be blamed for such incidents involving juveniles as they don't have control over their children.
Noting that the accused -- Amar Santish Gaikwad (alleged middleman), Aditya Avinash Sood and Ashish Satish Mittal (parents of two other juveniles in the car) -- had been in custody for 18 months, the bench had granted bail to them.
On January 23, the top court sought a response from the Maharashtra government on a plea filed by Gaikwad seeking bail in the case.
Earlier on January 7, the top court sought a response from the Maharashtra government on pleas filed by two other accused seeking bail in the case.
Sood (52) and Mittal (37) were arrested on August 19 last year, as their blood samples were used for tests in connection with two minors who were in the car along with the 17-year-old main accused at the time of the accident.
The Bombay High Court on December 16 last year rejected the bail pleas of eight accused, including Gaikwad, Sood and Mittal, in the case.
The Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) had granted bail to the minor accused on lenient terms, sparking nationwide outrage. The bail conditions included writing a 300-word essay on road safety.
As bail to the accused juvenile triggered outrage, the Pune police approached the JJB to review its decision. The board then modified the order and sent the juvenile to an observation home.
In June, the high court ordered the release of the juvenile.
While the juvenile involved in the case was released from an observation home, 10 accused, including his parents Vishal Agarwal and Shivani Agarwal, doctors Ajay Tawre and Shreehari Halnor, Sassoon Hospital's staffer Atul Ghatkamble, Sood, Mittal and Arun Kumar Singh, were sent to jail in the blood sample swapping case.

The Supreme Court questioned the title of filmmaker Neeraj Pandey’s film ‘Ghooskhor Pandat’, issued notices to the Centre and CBFC, and sought an affidavit stating it does not denigrate any community.

Supreme Court Questions Title of Film 'Ghooskhor Pandat'

Supreme Court Challenges 'Ghooskhor Pandat' Title

The Supreme Court questioned the title of filmmaker Neeraj Pandey&rsquo;s film &lsquo;Ghooskhor Pandat&rsquo;, issued notices to the Centre and CBFC, and sought an affidavit stating it does not denigrate any community.

Observing that a section of society cannot be denigrated in the name of freedom of expression, the Supreme Court on Thursday rapped filmmaker Neeraj Pandey over the title of his movie 'Ghooskhor Pandat'.
The top court was hearing a plea seeking a stay on the release of the Manoj Bajpayee-starrer film on OTT platform Netflix.
A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan issued notices to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Central Board of Film Certification and Pandey on a plea against the movie.
"Why should you denigrate a section of society by using such a title. Freedom of expression is one thing. That doesn&rsquo;t give license to denigrate anybody. This is against morality and public order. We will not allow you to release the film unless you tell us the changed title...We thought filmmakers, journalists, etc are responsible people," the bench said.
The top court directed Pandey to file an affidavit that the film 'Ghooskhor Pandat' doesn't denigrate any section of society.
During the hearing, the counsel appearing for the filmmaker submitted that a new title has not been decided as yet and assured the court that it will be such that there will not be any conflict.
"You make a submission that you will not have this title. We are fully respecting the right under Article 19(1)(a). But there are certain restrictions. We want to include the aspect of fraternity. It is one of the basic principles of the Constitution. We want to relate this matter to fraternity.
Why can&rsquo;t there be a restraint when you try to make this kind of division when there are already fissures in society. Why should you denigrate anybody? Why should you denigrate a section of society by this kind of title? Being woke is one thing. But denigrating the public and creating this kind of unrest. You are adding to the unrest," the bench observed.
The matter would be heard again on February 19.
The plea alleged that the movie promotes caste and religion-based stereotyping and threatens public order, communal harmony, and constitutional values.
'Ghooskhor Pandat', produced by Pandey, was announced by Netflix at an event in Mumbai recently.
It also stars Nushrat Bharuccha, Saqib Saleem, Akshay Oberoi, and Divya Dutta.
The top court was hearing a PIL filed by Atul Mishra, National Organisation Secretary of the Brahman Samaj of India, seeking directions to stay the release of the movie.
The plea alleged that the movie title and storyline are prima facie offensive and derogatory, which portray the Brahmin community in a defamatory manner.
The PIL objected to the use of the word &ldquo;Pandat&rdquo;, a caste and religion-identifying title, alongside &ldquo;Ghooskhor&rdquo;, which denotes bribery and moral corruption.
On Tuesday, Netflix India had informed the Delhi High Court that the film will be renamed.
"The producer has taken a conscious decision in light of the concern that has arisen to change the title of the film from 'Ghooskhor Pandat' to an alternate title which more accurately reflects the film's narrative and intent," the HC had recorded.

The Supreme Court directed Mumbai’s JJ Hospital to terminate a 30-week pregnancy of a minor, ruling that no woman, including a minor, can be compelled to continue an unwanted pregnancy.

'Can't compel woman to complete pregnancy': SC allows minor to terminate 30-week pregnancy

The Supreme Court directed Mumbai&rsquo;s JJ Hospital to terminate a 30-week pregnancy of a minor, ruling that no woman, including a minor, can be compelled to continue an unwanted pregnancy.

Directing medical termination of a 30-week pregnancy of a 17-year-old girl, the Supreme Court on Friday said that courts cannot compel a woman, much less a minor, to continue a pregnancy.
A bench of Justices B V Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan noted that the girl had become pregnant while being in a relationship with a neighbourhood boy and sought to medically terminate her pregnancy.
The bench asked Mumbai's JJ Hospital to undertake the medical termination of the pregnancy of the minor while ensuring that all necessary medical safeguards are followed.
The bench observed that the court had considered the fact that the right of the minor child to continue the pregnancy, which, on the face of it, was "illegitimate" as she herself was a minor and was facing the pregnancy due to an unfortunate situation arising from a relationship.
It said the issue was not whether the relationship was consensual or the result of sexual assault.
"What has to be considered in the instant case is the right of the minor child to continue a pregnancy which is ex-facie illegitimate in as much as she is a minor and has to face this unfortunate situation of having the pregnancy owing to a relationship that she had. The issue is not whether the relationship was consensual or whether it was a case of sexual assault. Ultimately, the fact is that the child to be is not legitimate and secondly, the mother to be of the child does not want to bear the child," the bench said.
The top court noted the report of the medical board of the hospital that there was no threat to the life of the child and the mother if allowed to give birth after full term.
"If the interest of the mother is to be taken note of, then her reproductive autonomy must be given sufficient emphasis. The court cannot compel any woman, much less a minor child, to complete her pregnancy if she is otherwise not intending to do so," the bench said.
During the hearing, Justice Nagarathna noted the difficult questions of morality and legal questions which the court has to deal with and said if the court does not deal with the medical termination, then people will visit quacks and illegal medical establishments and that will not be safe for them.
It said that while the birth of a child ultimately results in a life, the decisive factor in the present case was the clear and consistent unwillingness of the minor to continue the pregnancy.
"It is also difficult for us but there is no other way. Should we compel her to give birth to a child? Because the child which will be born is also ultimately going to be a life.
"There is another question; if she can terminate the pregnancy at 24 weeks, then why not at 30 weeks? Ultimately, she doesn't want to continue the pregnancy. Bottom line is she doesn't want to give birth, that is the difficulty," the bench observed.
It added that sometimes it takes time to decide whether to terminate the pregnancy or not.
"There are so many cases where termination takes place beyond what's stipulated under the MTP (Medical Termination of Pregnancy) Act (1971). And doctors say we won't do it.
"Where will such people go? To quacks and unauthorised doctors. That will be dangerous," it said.
Counsel appearing for the Maharashtra government submitted that according to medical reports, even if the child is allowed to be born today, the child is going to be alive and one of the views of the high court was that the baby can be given to an orphanage if the mother does not want to keep it.
The top court said it will release the operating part of the order for the benefit of the hospital and the detailed order will follow.

The Supreme Court declines to entertain Jan Suraaj Party’s petition seeking fresh Bihar elections over alleged misuse of a welfare scheme, asking it to approach the Patna High Court.

SC declines to entertain Jan Suraaj's plea challenging 2025 Bihar Assembly elections

The Supreme Court declines to entertain Jan Suraaj Party&rsquo;s petition seeking fresh Bihar elections over alleged misuse of a welfare scheme, asking it to approach the Patna High Court.

The Supreme Court on Friday refused to entertain a petition filed by the Jan Suraaj Party, founded by former political strategist Prashant Kishor, seeking annulment of 2025 Bihar Assembly elections on the ground of violation of the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) ahead of polls.
The party had alleged the debt-ridden state, in violation of the MCC, gave away Rs 15,600 crore under the Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana just ahead of polls, which denied a level-playing field to other political parties.
Pulling up the party for trying to use the judicial forum to gain popularity and secure relief after having lost the polls, a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi asked it to approach the Patna High Court as the issue pertained to only one state.
"How many votes did you get? Once people reject you, you use the judicial forum to get relief! Somebody should have challenged the scheme itself then. That is not the prayer before us. You just want an omnibus direction for declaration of election of the entire state as null and void," the CJI said.
The bench said the plea was nothing but a composite election petition for the entire state.
"Since it deals with only one State, please go to that High Court. In some cases, there is a serious issue of freebies which we will seriously examine," the bench said.
Senior advocate CU Singh, appearing for the party, said that the scheme under which the payment was made to voters, was announced just before the polls and the payments were made when the MCC was in force.
"But when a State has a grave fiscal deficit and it is a dole in the sense that 10,000 will be paid immediately and over 35 lakh people enrolled in this scheme just after the MCC was announced," the senior lawyer said.
"Direct transfer schemes are different. This is about women self help groups," the bench said.
The Jan Suraaj Party (JSP) had moved the Supreme Court seeking fresh elections in Bihar after the BJP-led NDA retained power in the 243-member Assembly by winning 202 seats, while the INDIA bloc secured 35 seats.
The JSP failed to win any seat, with most of its candidates forfeiting their deposits.
The petition accused the state government of violating the MCC by transferring Rs 10,000 to women beneficiaries under the Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana after the poll schedule was announced and sought action under Article 324 of the Constitution and Section 123 of the Representation of the People Act.
The Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana provides an initial financial grant of Rs 10,000 to women to promote self-employment and small businesses in the state.

The Supreme Court modified its 2017 order, permitting former BCCI president Anurag Thakur to participate in board activities after his prior apology.

SC modifies 2017 order, says Anurag Thakur free to participate in affairs of BCCI

The Supreme Court modified its 2017 order, permitting former BCCI president Anurag Thakur to participate in board activities after his prior apology.

In a relief to former BCCI president Anurag Thakur, the Supreme Court on Thursday modified its January 2017 order and said he shall be free to participate in the affairs of the cricket board according to rules and regulations.&nbsp;
In January 2017, the apex court had directed Thakur to "cease and desist" from being associated with the affairs of the Board of Control for Cricket in India(BCCI).&nbsp;
On Thursday, a bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi applied the doctrine of proportionality and modified the January 2017 order.&nbsp;
The bench passed the order on an application filed by Thakur seeking modification of the 2017 order. The top court considered that Thakur had then tendered an unqualified apology before it.&nbsp;
The apex court had initiated contempt and perjury proceedings against Thakur on January 2, 2017 for filing a false affidavit regarding writing to the then International Cricket Council (ICC) chairperson Shashank Manohar on the issue of the BCCI's autonomy.&nbsp;
On July 14, 2017, the top court granted relief to Thakur and dropped the contempt and perjury proceedings against him after he tendered an unconditional and unequivocal apology to it in person.&nbsp;

Prashant Kishor’s Jan Suraaj Party approaches the Supreme Court seeking fresh Bihar elections, alleging poll code violations over Rs 10,000 transfers to women voters.

Jan Suraaj Party Challenges Bihar Elections in Supreme Court

Bihar Election Challenge by Jan Suraaj Party

Prashant Kishor&rsquo;s Jan Suraaj Party approaches the Supreme Court seeking fresh Bihar elections, alleging poll code violations over Rs 10,000 transfers to women voters.

Former poll strategist Prashant Kishor's Jan Suraaj Party has moved the Supreme Court challenging the Bihar Assembly Elections, 2025 and seeking fresh polls in the state.&nbsp;
The matter is likely to come up for hearing on Friday before a bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi.
The BJP-led NDA retained power in the state, winning 202 of the total 243 seats, while the INDIA bloc bagged only 35, including six of the Congress. The Jan Suraaj Party failed to open its account in the assembly polls, with most of its candidates losing their deposits.
In its plea, the party has accused the Bihar government of violating the Model Code by transferring Rs 10,000 each to women under the Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana after the announcement of poll schedule.
The petition has sought directions to the poll panel to take action under Article 324 of Constitution (superintendence, direction and control of the preparation of electoral rolls for, and the conduct of, all elections) and Section 123 of the Representation of People Act against direct transfer of money to women voters in the state.
The Mukhyamantri Mahila Rojgar Yojana provides an initial financial grant of Rs 10,000 to women to launch small businesses and promote self-employment and women's empowerment in the state.

The Supreme Court agreed to list in March a PIL seeking action against political parties promising “irrational freebies” before elections.

Supreme Court to Hear PIL on Political Freebies in March

Supreme Court Reviews Political Freebies PIL

The Supreme Court agreed to list in March a PIL seeking action against political parties promising &ldquo;irrational freebies&rdquo; before elections.

The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to list for hearing in March a PIL seeking direction to seize the symbol or deregister a political party that promises or distributes &ldquo;irrational freebies&rdquo; before polls.
Lawyer-petitioner Ashwini Updhyaya told a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi that the notices on his PIL were issued to the Centre and the Election Commission in 2022 itself, and urged it to list the matter soon.
&ldquo;Except Sun and Moon, everything is promised by political parties to voters during elections and this amounts to corrupt practice,&rdquo; the lawyer said.
&ldquo;This is an important issue. You please remind us and mention it at the end. We will list in March,&rdquo; the CJI said.
On January 25, 2022, a bench headed by the then Chief Justice N V Ramana had sought replies from the Centre and the Election Commission on the PIL seeking direction to seize the symbol or deregister a political party that promises or distributes &ldquo;irrational freebies&rdquo; before polls.
The bench had termed it a &ldquo;serious issue&rdquo; and said sometimes &ldquo;freebie budget is going beyond regular budget&rdquo;.
The plea urged the court to declare that the promise of "irrational freebies" from public funds before elections unduly influences the voters, disturbs the level-playing field and vitiates the purity of the poll process.
The petition filed through advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey has, as an alternative, sought a direction to the Centre to enact a law in this regard.
&ldquo;Petitioner submits that recent trend of political parties to influence voters by offering freebies with an eye on elections is not only the greatest threat to the survival of democratic values but also injures the spirit of the Constitution,&rdquo; said the plea.
&ldquo;This unethical practice is just like giving bribes to the electorate at the cost of the exchequer to stay in power and must be avoided to preserve democratic principles and practices,&rdquo; it said.
The petition has also sought a direction to the ECI to insert an additional condition in the relevant paragraphs of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order 1968, which deals with conditions for recognition as a state party, that a "political party shall not promise/distribute irrational freebies from the public fund before the election".
The petitioner has urged the apex court to declare that the promise or distribution of private goods or services, which are not for public purposes, from public funds before the elections, violates several articles of the Constitution, including Article 14 (equality before law).
The plea has referred to the promises being made by certain political parties ahead of the Assembly poll in some states.
The fulcrum of democracy is the electoral process, and the distribution of money and the promise of freebies have reached alarming levels with elections being countermanded several times, it said.
&ldquo;Petitioner submits that arbitrary promises of irrational freebies violate the ECI's mandate for free and fair elections and distributing private goods-services, which are not for public purposes, from public funds clearly violate Articles 14, 162, 266(3) and 282 of the Constitution,&rdquo; it said.

West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee urges Supreme Court to act on Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, alleging state is targeted and voters face mass disenfranchisement.

SIR row: Mamata Banerjee urges SC to save democracy; alleges WB targeted, its people bulldozed

West Bengal CM Mamata Banerjee urges Supreme Court to act on Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls, alleging state is targeted and voters face mass disenfranchisement.

In a rare move by a serving chief minister, Mamata Banerjee on Wednesday argued her petition in the Supreme Court against the special intensive revision of electoral rolls and alleged unfair targeting of West Bengal by the poll panel and bulldozing of its citizens.
Urging the top court to "save democracy" and intervene to ensure fair special intensive revision (SIR) of electoral rolls by the Election Commission, she highlighted that people alive have been declared dead by the poll panel.
She once referred to the poll panel as the "WhatsApp commission", in an apparent reference to directions allegedly being passed by the EC to electoral officials on WhatsApp.
Banerjee, who was represented by senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Shyam Divan, sought the nod of a bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant to personally advance her submissions.
She said her state was not getting justice anywhere and despite having written six letters to the poll panel on SIR, she has not received any reply.
"Their SIR process is only for deletion, not for inclusion," she told the bench, also comprising justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi.
Asking why the same yardstick was not applied in Assam, Banerjee said, "West Bengal is being targeted." "They are targeting West Bengal to bulldoze its people," said the chief minister, who was permitted by the bench to supplement submissions of her lawyer.
At the outset, Divan started his submissions and later, Mamata was seen standing beside him. She then requested the bench to permit her to address the court.
"If you can allow me five minutes only," she asked.
The CJI responded by saying the court would give her not five but 15 minutes to advance her submissions.
She flagged difficulties being faced by the citizens due to the SIR exercise and said people were happy that the apex court gave a direction to include Aadhaar as one of the documents in the process.
Banerjee alleged that despite the apex court's direction, the poll panel was not allowing Aadhaar and was seeking other documents from the voters for electoral roll revision.
"In other states, documents like domicile certificate, family register card etc. are allowed... they are only targeting Bengal on the eve of elections. What was the hurry," she asked.
She said the process, which usually takes two years, was being undertaken in a short span of three months even during festival and harvesting season in the state.
Banerjee also claimed that many people who are alive have been declared dead by the EC during the ongoing process.
She then flagged the issue of deaths of officials who are involved in the SIR exercise.
Senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, appearing for the EC, countered the charges and alleged that the West Bengal government has provided the services of only 80 grade-two officers like SDMs for overseeing the SIR process.
He said only low-ranked government employees like Anganwadi workers have been provided by the West Bengal government for the process.
Banerjee countered the EC's claim and said the state has provided whatever was sought by the poll panel.
At the outset of her submissions, Banerjee quoted Rabindranath Tagore and said, "The problem is our lawyers always fought our case from the beginning but when everything is finished, we are not getting justice. When justice is behind doors. We are not getting justice anywhere."
"I am a bonded labourer sir... I am from a common family and I am not fighting for my party," she said.
When the counsel appearing for the EC interrupted, Banerjee, with folded hands, said, "Please allow me to speak sir!"
She flagged that married women were being put to notice for shifting to their in-laws&rsquo; house or using their husband's surname.
Banerjee claimed the poll panel has not complied with the top court's directions on the logical discrepancy list.
When the EC's counsel objected to her submissions, CJI Kant interrupted saying, "Madam has come all the way to speak."
During the hearing, the bench observed that "genuine persons must remain on the electoral roll".
The CJI said every problem has a solution and it must be ensured that no innocent person is left out.
Concluding her submissions, Banerjee conveyed her regards to the bench for giving her the opportunity to argue and urged it to "save democracy".
The bench issued notices and sought replies by February 9 from the Election Commission and the Chief Electoral Officer of West Bengal on her petition.

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee appears before the Supreme Court for a crucial hearing on petitions challenging the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.

Mamata Banerjee Persists in Electoral Roll Case at Supreme Court

Mamata Banerjee at Supreme Court for Electoral Roll Revision Case

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee appears before the Supreme Court for a crucial hearing on petitions challenging the Election Commission&rsquo;s Special Intensive Revision of electoral rolls.

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Wednesday reached the Supreme Court ahead of a crucial hearing on the petitions challenging the Election Commission&rsquo;s ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls in the state.&nbsp;
The chief minister has also moved an interlocutory application seeking permission to appear and argue in person. Banerjee is personally present in court room one along with her lawyers.&nbsp;
A gate pass was issued in the chief minister's name on Tuesday.&nbsp;
As per the apex court website, a bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi is scheduled to hear the petitions of Banerjee and three others filed by Mostari Banu and TMC MPs Derek O'Brien and Dola Sen.&nbsp;

The Supreme Court directs the CBI and ED to conduct a fair and prompt probe into alleged banking and corporate fraud involving Anil Ambani and ADAG companies.

SC Directs CBI, ED for Fair Probe into Anil Ambani's Fraud Case

SC Orders Probe into Anil Ambani's Fraud

The Supreme Court directs the CBI and ED to conduct a fair and prompt probe into alleged banking and corporate fraud involving Anil Ambani and ADAG companies.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the CBI and the ED to conduct a &ldquo;fair&rdquo;, &ldquo;prompt&rdquo; and dispassionate probe into alleged massive banking and corporate fraud involving the Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group (ADAG), Anil Ambani and the group companies.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi sought fresh status reports in four weeks from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on the progress made by them in the ongoing investigation against Ambani and ADAG firms.
Observing that the probe agencies have already taken time to start the probe, the bench asked the ED to constitute a SIT comprising senior officers to probe the ADAG and others.
The bench took note of the appearances made by Anil Ambani and ADAG through senior lawyers Mukul Rohatgi and Shyam Divan and granted them four weeks time to file responses to the PIL.
Rohatgi opposed the submission seeking a court direction to ensure that Ambani does not flee the country and assured the bench that he will remain in India.
He said that Ambani will not leave without the leave of this court.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the probe agencies, said there are various look out circulars issued to ensure that the person concerned does not go out of the country.
Earlier, the bench had asked the CBI and the ED to file status reports in a sealed cover in the case.
On November 18, the bench issued notices to the Centre, CBI, ED, Anil Ambani and ADAG on the PIL.
The bench, however, said it was granting them one last opportunity to appear and file their responses in the case.
The PIL filed by EAS Sarma alleged systematic diversion of public funds, fabrication of financial statements and institutional complicity across multiple entities of the Anil Ambani-led Reliance ADAG.

The Supreme Court criticised Meta and WhatsApp over privacy breaches, highlighting citizens' right to privacy, while hearing appeals against a Rs 213.14 crore CCI penalty and ordering MEITY as a party.

Supreme Court Warns Meta, WhatsApp on Privacy Issues

Supreme Court Criticizes Meta, WhatsApp Privacy Policy

The Supreme Court criticised Meta and WhatsApp over privacy breaches, highlighting citizens' right to privacy, while hearing appeals against a Rs 213.14 crore CCI penalty and ordering MEITY as a party.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday came down heavily on Meta Platforms Inc and WhatsApp while hearing their appeals against a Competition Commission of India order imposing a penalty of Rs 213.14 crore over the privacy policy, saying tech giants cannot &ldquo;play with the right to privacy of citizens in the name of data sharing&rdquo;.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi said that it will pass an interim order on February 9. The top court ordered that the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology be made a party to the petitions.
It was hearing appeals filed by Meta and WhatsApp against a National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) judgment that upheld the CCI&rsquo;s findings of abuse of dominance, while granting limited relief on advertising-related data sharing.
"You can't play with the right of privacy of this country in the name of data sharing. We will not allow you to share a single word of the data, either you give an undertaking...you cannot violate the right of privacy of citizens,&rdquo; the CJI said.
The bench said the right to privacy is zealously guarded in the country and noted that the privacy terms are &ldquo;so cleverly crafted&rdquo; that a common person cannot understand them.
&ldquo;This is a decent way of committing theft of private information, we will not allow you to do that... You have to give an undertaking otherwise, we have to pass an order,&rdquo; the CJI said.

The Supreme Court granted bail to three accused in the 2024 Pune Porsche accident case and held parents responsible for juvenile-related incidents.

SC grants bail to three accused in 2024 Pune Porsche crash case

The Supreme Court granted bail to three accused in the 2024 Pune Porsche accident case and held parents responsible for juvenile-related incidents.

The Supreme Court on Monday granted bail to three accused in the 2024 Pune Porsche accident case that claimed two lives, while observing that parents are to be blamed for such incidents involving juveniles.
A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan observed that parents are not able to control their children. &ldquo;Substance abuse is another thing but giving them (children) car keys and funds to have a gala time is unacceptable,&rdquo; the court observed.
On January 23, the top court sought a response from the Maharashtra government on a plea filed by accused Amar Santish Gaikwad seeking bail in the case.
Gaikwad, represented by advocate Sana Raees Khan, was alleged to be a middleman who gave Rs 3 lakh to the assistant of a doctor in a hospital to replace a blood sample of the juvenile accused.
On May 19, 2024, a Porsche allegedly driven by a 17-year-old boy under the influence of alcohol fatally knocked down two IT professionals in Pune&rsquo;s Kalyani Nagar area.
On January 7, the top court sought a response from the Maharashtra government on pleas filed by two other accused seeking bail in the case.
Aditya Avinash Sood (52) and Ashish Satish Mittal (37), represented by senior advocates Siddharth Dave and Siddharth Agarwal, were arrested on August 19 last year, as their blood samples were used for tests in connection with two minors who were in the car along with the 17-year-old main accused at the time of the accident.
The high court on December 16 last year rejected the bail pleas of eight accused, including Gaikwad, Sood and Mittal, in the case.
The Juvenile Justice Board (JJB) had granted bail to the minor accused on lenient terms, sparking nationwide outrage. The bail conditions included writing a 300-word essay on road safety.
Following public outrage, the Pune police approached the JJB to review its decision. The board later modified the order and sent the juvenile to an observation home. In June, the high court ordered the release of the juvenile.
While the juvenile involved in the case was released from the observation home, 10 accused, including his parents Vishal Agarwal and Shivani Agarwal, doctors Ajay Tawre and Shreehari Halnor, Sassoon Hospital staffer Atul Ghatkamble, Aditya Avinash Sood, Ashish Mittal and Arun Kumar Singh, and two middlemen, were sent to jail in the blood sample swapping case.

The Supreme Court has directed all states and Union Territories to provide free biodegradable sanitary pads to schoolgirls and held that menstrual health is part of the fundamental right to life under Article 21.

SC says right to menstrual health a fundamental right; orders free sanitary pads for school girls

The Supreme Court has directed all states and Union Territories to provide free biodegradable sanitary pads to schoolgirls and held that menstrual health is part of the fundamental right to life under Article 21.

The Supreme Court on Friday directed all states and Union Territories to ensure girl students in private and government schools are provided bio-degradable menstrual sanitary pads for free, and held that the right to menstrual health is a part of the fundamental right to life enshrined in the Constitution.
A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan told states and Union Territories to ensure separate toilets for female and male students in all schools. It also said all schools, irrespective of whether they are state-run or controlled, will have to provide disabled-friendly toilets.
"The right to menstrual health is part of the right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution," the court held. It said that if private schools fail to provide these facilities, they will be de-recognised.
The bench also said that it would hold governments accountable if they too fail to provide for toilets and free sanitary pads to girls.
The top court has reserved its verdict on a PIL filed by Jaya Thakur on December 10, 2024, seeking pan-India implementation of the Union government's 'Menstrual Hygiene Policy for school-going girls' in government and government-aided schools for adolescent girls students from Classes 6 to 12.

supreme court

Categories