_20241220161511_original_image_40.webp)
The Delhi High Court has issued an order safeguarding the personality rights of veteran journalist Rajat Sharma. Justice Amit Bansal restrained eight individuals and entities from misusing Sharma’s name, image, voice, or likeness through artificial intelligence or deepfake technology for personal or commercial purposes without his explicit written consent.
Read More
The Singe Judge of the Delhi High Court, in its judgment, by citing various landmark judgments upon the doctrine of forum conveniens, reiterated that a writ petition cannot be entertained merely because a fraction of the cause of action has arisen within the territorial jurisdiction of a particular High Court.
Read More
The Supreme Court, upon hearing the arguments, noted that both the free certified copy and the certified copy obtained through payment are treated equally under law. The Court allowed the appeal and said that there should be no distinction between the two types of certified copies when it comes to the computation of limitation periods for filling appeals.
Read More_20240925223838_original_image_27.webp)
Bombay HC’s judgement reinforces the principle that governments should not have the power to unilaterally determine the truth or regulate user generated content. As India continues to navigate its digital governance landscape, the judgement sets an important precedent for the creation of laws that upholding the constitutional rights while still addressing the legitimate need for regulating misinformation in the digital age.
Read More
Bench comprising Justice Hrishikesh Roy, Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice SVN Bhatti observed that, "It would be a travesty of justice if the petitioner is unable to secure the benefit of bail order for his inability to furnish local surety. This will infringe the rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution for the person, who continues to be detained despite a bail order in his favour."
Read More
After the High Court's Division Bench ruled against him, the appellant approached the Supreme Court. The Court agreed with the earlier ruling of a Single Judge, who found that the appellant had not properly resigned as the resignation had not been communicated to him and had been withdrawn before taking effect
Read More
Bench comprising Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice R. Mahadevan heard a batch of pleas wherein the question before the Court was whether an application for extension of time under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 19961 can be filed after the expiry of the period for making of the arbitral award
Read More
In its judgement, the Supreme Court said that prolonged incarceration amounts to unjust deprivation of liberty
Read More
The initiatives aim to advance the vision set by the Information Technology, Artificial Intelligence & Accessibility Committee, chaired by Justice Rajiv Shakdher, and include Justice Sanjeev Narula, Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, and Justice Girish Kathpalia
Read More
The Counsel for the applicant emphasised that her friendship with the husband is an insufficient ground to establish any wrongdoing on her part in connection with the present case.
Read More
