The century-old court complex at Tirur. M. Saleem, former treasurer of the Tirur Bar Association, said it was time for the authorities to consider a new court building for Tirur.
The century-old court complex at Tirur. The Tirur Bar Association has demanded a new court complex at Tirur, citing the limitations of the existing facility, which was established in 1910.The present court complex has served the region for over a century, but it lacks the infrastructure needed for the growing number of cases and modern judicial requirements, said Bar Association officials.More than 500 lawyers currently practise under the Tirur Bar Association, but the complex does not have enough space for offices, a library or consultation rooms.Hundreds of litigants, police personnel, witnesses, and court staff who visit the court daily also face a shortage of waiting areas, sanitation facilities, and parking space.The existing building does not have adequate facilities for digital courtrooms, e-filing, secure record storage, and accessibility for senior citizens and persons with disabilities.The Bar Association has demanded a centenary court complex with courtrooms, conference rooms, a legal library, waiting areas, digital display systems, and other public amenities under one roof.It has urged the Central and State governments, elected representatives, and judicial authorities to provide financial and administrative support for the project.K.M. Saleem, former treasurer of the Tirur Bar Association, said it was time for the authorities to consider a new court building for Tirur. Published - August 05, 2026 08:26 pm IST
Emphasising the ‘right to be forgotten’ in the digital age, the High Court of Karnataka has directed search engines and judicial record-keepers to mask the name of a woman, who was acquitted back in 2019 of charges under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, from online records Emphasising the “right to be forgotten” in the digital age, the High Court of Karnataka has directed search engines and judicial record-keepers to mask the name of a woman, who was acquitted back in 2019 of charges under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, from online records.“In an age where a few keystrokes often substitute for human inquiry and digital search results frequently shape public perception, the continued visibility of an obsolete accusation inflicts a civil consequence far graver than the criminal proceedings themselves,” the court observed.What is the right to be forgotten? | ExplainedJustice M. Nagaprasanna directed registrars of the High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru City Civil Court, the State police, Google, and Indian Kanoon portal, to mask the petitioner-woman’s name from their digital records pertaining to the case. This direction enables the Internet to “forget” the individual’s association with the crime, allowing her to live a life free from the stigma of an obsolete accusation.Iranian petitionerThe petitioner, an Iranian national, was one of the four accused prosecuted in 2013-14 for indulging in a prostitution racket through websites. However, all the accused were acquitted in 2019 by the trial court on finding several serious lapses by the police, including delayed registration of First Information Report and lack of sufficient evidence.Preserving the record: On the right to be forgottenSubsequently, the petitioner, who had come to India on a student visa from Iran, approached the United Nations seeking recognition as a refugee. She was given refugee status and permanent residence in Sweden, where she is residing at present.Digital spectreHowever, during her online search, she found her name linked to the crime in which she was acquitted and that prospective employers conducting routine background checks were confronted with the digital spectre of criminal prosecution, effectively “eclipsing the judicial vindication” she had received. This digital footprint, the High Court said, caused “grave prejudice” to her life.Stating that an acquittal is not just a procedural formality but a “solemn judicial declaration” of innocence, the High Court said that “the law cannot permit a situation where the acquittal risks becoming a paper declaration, bereft of any meaningful consequence in the lived realities of the individual.”‘Opening floodgates’Dismissing concerns expressed on behalf of the High Court’s registry for masking the name from the court records citing that granting such relief would “open floodgates”, Justice Nagaprasanna stated, “If the so-called Pandora’s box is opened by the enforcement of a fundamental right, so be it... Constitutional guarantees are not to be rationed for fear that others may invoke them.” Published - August 04, 2026 07:30 pm IST
Kanwariyas arrive to perform 'Jal Abhishek' to Shivling after collecting the holy water from the Narmada River on the first Monday of the month of Shravan, in Bhopal on Monday. | This year’s pilgrimage began on July 30 and is scheduled to conclude on August 11.A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta agreed to hear the plea, which has sought a coordinated inter-State mechanism for traffic and crowd management to ensure the safe passage of pilgrims participating in the yatra.“Issue notice, returnable on August 25, 2026,” the Bench said.The petition has also sought directions to ensure that routes used during the pilgrimage have adequate access for ambulances, fire services, police vehicles, and other emergency responders.“Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Union of India, in consultation with the concerned state governments and competent authorities, to formulate a comprehensive national standard operating procedure for the safe and orderly conduct of the Kanwar Yatra, consistent with the Constitution and the existing statutory framework,” the plea said.It has further sought periodic reviews of the measures adopted for the pilgrimage, and the submission of compliance reports before the appropriate authorities in a manner prescribed by the court.In July 2025, the apex court had prohibited the enforcement of directives issued by the Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand governments requiring eateries and food stalls along the Kanwar Yatra route to prominently display the names and other identity details of their owners and employees.The court had clarified that authorities could take steps to ensure that the Kanwariyas were served vegetarian food in accordance with prescribed hygiene standards and their dietary preferences. It had, however, held that the police could not assume powers vested in municipal authorities or impose restrictions on individual freedoms without the authority of the law. Published - August 04, 2026 10:56 pm IST
The story so farThe Lok Sabha on Monday (August 3, 2026) passed the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Amendment Bill, 2026, replacing an ordinance that increased the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court from 34 to 38 judges, including the Chief Justice of India (CJI). The Bill was passed by voice vote without a debate amid Opposition protests over unrelated issues. It now awaits consideration in the Rajya Sabha.What does the Bill do?The Bill amends the Supreme Court (Number of Judges) Act, 1956 to increase the number of puisne (ordinary) judges from 33 to 37. With the CJI included, the apex court’s sanctioned strength rises from 34 to 38.This is the first increase in the court’s strength since 2019, when Parliament raised the sanctioned strength from 31 to 34 judges.Why was the increase considered necessary?The government has cited the growing backlog of cases in the Supreme Court.As on January 1, 2026, 92,101 cases were pending before the apex court. In 2025, the court received 75,410 fresh cases but disposed of 65,615, despite functioning at nearly its full sanctioned strength.According to the government, the persistent gap between the institution and disposal of cases has made it necessary to increase the number of judges.What did the government tell Parliament?Introducing the Bill in the Lok Sabha, Union Law Minister Arjun Ram Meghwal said the increase in the sanctioned strength of the Supreme Court was aimed at ensuring speedy and effective justice by enabling the apex court to deal with its growing workload.The government has argued that the proposal was intended to address the mounting backlog of cases and improve the court’s disposal capacity. The increase in judicial strength, it said, was one of the “most exigent and viable solutions” to tackle pendency. It would also enable the Chief Justice of India to constitute Constitution Benches more frequently to hear cases involving substantial questions of constitutional law without disrupting the hearing of regular matters.How will additional judges help?The government says the increase will enable the Supreme Court to hear more cases simultaneously, thereby improving the disposal rate.One of the arguments in favour of additional judges is that it will make it easier for the Chief Justice of India to constitute Constitution Benches on a regular basis.The Constitution Benches, comprising at least five judges, hear cases involving substantial questions relating to the interpretation of the Constitution. Because of the heavy daily roster, constituting such Benches has often proved difficult.Is increasing the number of judges enough to reduce pendency?Most legal experts say it is a necessary step but not a complete solution.Pendency is also linked to delays in judicial appointments, rising litigation, frequent adjournments, vacancies in High Courts and the subordinate judiciary, and the large number of appeals that reach the Supreme Court.The backlog of cases across all courts in India had crossed 5.5 crore, with the bulk of them in the lower courts.The India Justice Report, 2025, noted that there are 15.9 judges for every million Indians, as against a Law Commission of India recommendation of 50 judges per million in 1987.In 22 of the 25 States, the same report noted, cases pending for over three years in subordinate courts amount to 25% of all cases pending.And across 25 high courts, the number of cases which are pending for over five years accounts for 51%.Experts have argued that improving case management, strengthening the High Courts and filling vacancies across the judiciary are essential to reduce pendency.Why did the government promulgate an ordinance?The Union Cabinet approved the proposal in May 2026, when Parliament was not in session. The government therefore promulgated an ordinance under Article 123 of the Constitution, allowing the increase in sanctioned strength to take effect immediately.After the ordinance came into force, five judges were appointed again
Former Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) chief and BJP leader Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh. File. | Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM) Ashwini Panwar announced the judgment. “Noting that both accused are honourably acquitted, the Court observed that the unexplained delay, inconsistencies, contradiction on major issues, and post-incident conduct of all complainants made their version highly unbelievable,” Mr. Singh’s Rajiv Mohan said.Speaking to reporters outside the court, Mr. Singh said: “On the first day, I had said that if any allegation against me was proved, I would hang myself. The court has now honourably acquitted me. I am happy and grateful to my lawyers.”“For now, this is all I can say. I will comment further after going through the court’s reasoned order,” the ex-BJP MP added.Public prosecutor Manish Rawat, however, said that after examining the detailed order, “appropriate action” would be taken before the higher courts.The prosecution can challenge the magisterial court’s verdict before the Delhi High Court.Several renowned wrestlers, including Sakshi Malik, Vinesh Phogat, Bajrang Punia, and Sangeeta Phogat had protested for months in New Delhi in 2023, demanding the arrest of the BJP leader for allegedly sexually harassing several women grapplers, including a minor. The complaint stated that the harassment took place between 2016 and 2019 at the WFI office, at Mr. Singh’s official residence, and also during trips abroad.As the protest continued for weeks in 2023, the Sports Ministry had constituted an oversight committee to internally investigate the matter. The police filed an FIR against Mr. Singh after the intervention of the Supreme Court in May 2023. In June, a 1,000-page chargesheet was filed at the Rouse Avenue court.After a trial court framed charges of sexual harassment, intimidation and outraging the modesty of women against the former lawmaker, Mr. Singh approached the High Court claiming that he has been falsely implicated and no offence as alleged by the prosecution has been committed by him.Mr. Singh, in his plea, has contended that the investigation was done in a biased manner as only the version of the victims, who were interested in taking ‘revenge’ on him, was considered. He said the charge sheet was filed before the trial court without taking care of the falsehood of allegation.Last year in May, a Delhi Court had accepted a closure report filed by the Delhi Police seeking to cancel a sexual harassment case filed by a wrestler, who was minor at the time of lodging the complaint. The police had recommended the cancellation of the complaint involving the minor wrestler, saying “no corroborative evidence” was found. Published - August 03, 2026 11:05 am IST
HMT gave an undertaking to the High Court that it would not deal with the land remaining in its possession in any manner, including by way of sale, lease or licence, nor encumber it by creating any charge or changing the character of the property. | , a Public Sector Undertaking (PSU), of its land situated in Jalahalli, Bengaluru, while restraining the PSU from felling any trees on the vacant land in its possession, other than the lands already alienated in favour of third parties.Justice Suraj Govindaraj passed the interim order on a petition filed by the company challenging the June 15 order passed by the authorised officer and Deputy Conservator of Forests (DCF), Bengaluru Urban, asking HMT to hand over 430 acres and 21 guntas in the Peenya Plantation and Jarakabande Sandal Reserve to the Forest Department within 30 days after finding it to be “forest land”.As it was pointed out to the court that the issue relating to the status of the land as “forest land” is pending before the apex court, Justice Govindaraj said the final adjudication of HMT’s petition would be subject to the outcome of the proceedings before the apex court.UndertakingMeanwhile, HMT gave an undertaking to the High Court that it would not deal with the land remaining in its possession in any manner, including by way of sale, lease or licence, nor encumber it by creating any charge or changing the character of the property.In its petition, HMT claimed that the proceedings initiated by the Forest Department under Section 64A (penalty for unauthorisedly taking possession of land constituted as reserved forest) of the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963, were without jurisdiction, as the lands had been granted to the company during 1960-61 by the erstwhile State of Mysore, before the commencement of the 1963 Act.It was also contended in the petition that the proceedings conducted by the DCF amounted to an abuse of the process of law, as the issue relating to the status of the land, including an application filed by the State government itself, was pending before the apex court. Published - July 29, 2026 10:51 pm IST
Actor Allu Arjun on Wednesday appeared virtually before the Nampally criminal court in connection with the Sandhya Theatre stampede case. The hearing commenced at around 11 a.m., following which the court adjourned the matter to August 17.The case stems from the December 4, 2024 stampede at Sandhya Theatre during the premiere of the actor’s film Pushpa 2: The Rule. A woman was killed and her young son was critically injured in the incident after a large crowd gathered to catch a glimpse of the actor.The Chikkadpally police had booked Allu Arjun, the management of Sandhya Theatre and members of his security team, alleging lapses that led to the stampede. The actor was arrested on December 13, 2024, and was granted interim bail by the High Court on the same day before being released from prison the following morning. The proceedings on Wednesday were held through virtual mode, and the Nampally court posted the next hearing in the case to August 17. Published - July 29, 2026 09:58 pm IST
The transgender community in Bihar on Wednesday (July 29, 2026) sought to dedicate a temple to Prime Minister Narendra Modi for giving the community “respect and rights”. The Bihar State Transgender Welfare Board also approved the proposal to construct the temple at its maiden meeting on the day.sThe Board functions under the State government’s Social Welfare Department. “Since the transgender community in Bihar does not have a temple of its own, I proposed to build a temple for Prime Minister Narendra Modi because he gave us respect and rights and the proposal got the support of all members of the Board and it was approved today,” said Board member Ranjan Singh. The Bihar government had constituted the Board in August 2025 to protect “rights of the transgender community and take measures for its social development and empowerment”.According to the 2011 census, Bihar has a transgender population of 40, 827. But, the State government’s caste survey, conducted in 2022, put their figure at only 825 (about 0.0006% of the State’s total population of over 13.7 crore). The community strongly disputed the figure, arguing many of its members remained “uncounted and unregistered”. However, according to community sources, the State’s unenumerated transgender population is about three lakh.Earlier, the State government, following legal directives, had begun recruiting transgender candidates into the police force. Some members of the community also made headlines a few years ago after joining the State police as sub-inspectors.“Today’s (Wednesday) meeting marked the first meeting of the Bihar State Transgender Welfare Board following the enactment of the Transgender Persons Protection of Rights Act, 2019, which provides the community with institutional representation in the State secretariat”, Mr. Singh said.In the 2025 Assembly Elections, Priti Kinnar, 41, a member of the community, contested from the Bhore constituency in Gopalganj district on a ticket from Prashant Kishor’s Jan Suraaj Party (JSP). However, she lost the poll.Another member of the community, Reshma Prasad, and her organisation, Dostana Safar, opened Bihar’s first transgender-run restaurant, Satrangi Dostana Restro, in Patna in July 2023.“The situation of transgender community members in a State like Bihar is not good at all. They need support from both the government and the public for their welfare and empowerment,” said a member of the community, requesting anonymity. Published - July 29, 2026 07:56 pm IST
TMC MP Mahua Moitra. File | The Krishnanagar MP prayed before the court for an interim order preventing coercive police action in the case and quashing of proceedings against her in the case registered at Hogolberia police station in Nadia district.Justice Saugata Bhattacharyya directed Ms. Moitra to appear before the investigating officer on August 14 for questioning in the case.The court directed that no coercive steps be taken against her till October 5 subject to compliance with the conditions alluded to until October or until further order, whichever is earlier.Noting that the BNS (Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita) provisions applied to Ms. Moitra carry a maximum punishment below seven years, the court observed that she is entitled to protection from coercive action provided she cooperates with the investigation.Justice Bhattacharyya directed Ms. Moitra to cooperate with the probe and comply with police notices by appearing before the investigating officer.The court directed that the matter will be heard again on October 1.On a prayer by her lawyer Ayan Bhattacharya, directed the police to ensure Moitra is not subjected to pelting of eggs when she appears before the investigating agency.Her lawyer contended before the court that the punishment prescribed for the alleged offences is well below seven years and therefore, she is entitled to protection from any coercive action.The petitioner stated that she will cooperate with the investigation.Ms. Moitra's lawyer stated that the Krishnanagar MP is at present in Delhi and will be engaged in the monsoon session of Parliament which is scheduled to continue till August 13.He submitted that she will be able to appear before the investigating officer in virtual mode, if required, till August 13, and will be present personally on or from August 14.Representing the state, Advocate General Surojit Nath Mitra opposed the petition, stating that Ms. Moitra had not complied with notices to appear before the investigating officer on four previous occasions. Published - July 21, 2026 05:45 pm IST
A view of the Ram Mandir, in Ayodhya. | As per the apex court’s cause list for July 20, four separate pleas related to the issue would come up for hearing before a Bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana.The Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the alleged embezzlement of donations at the Ram temple may submit an interim report to the Supreme Court on Monday in compliance with the apex court’s directions, sources said on Friday (July 17, 2026). The alleged theft of donations offered at the Ram temple surfaced in the first week of June and has so far led to the arrest of eight persons and the resignation of two senior functionaries from the Trust. Follow LIVE updates hereJuly 20, 2026 15:28 Status report of the investigation filed; eight people arrested: Solicitor GeneralSolicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for Uttar Pradesh, says the status report of the investigation has been filed. Eight people arrested. Cannot divulge more in an ongoing probe.July 20, 2026 12:51 Supreme Court to hear pleas seeking probe into Ram temple donations theft row on July 20Supreme Court to hear pleas seeking probe into Ram temple donations theft row on July 20Supreme Court to hear pleas on July 20 regarding probe into alleged Ram temple donation theft and financial irregularities. Published - July 20, 2026 03:26 pm IST
Discussion (0)