SC NEWS

[Covid-19] लोकांनी लसीच्या दुष्परीणामाचे दावे करू नये व लस कंपन्यांचा लाखो कोटींचा फायदा व्हावा यासाठी खोटे नरेटीव्ह चालविणारे डॉ. संजय ओक व दै. लोकमत चे संपादक मंडळाविरुद्ध फौजदारी आणि कोर्ट अवमानना ची कारवाईची नोटीस.

• Uncategorized

[Covid-19] लोकांनी लसीच्या दुष्परीणामाचे दावे करू नये व लस कंपन्यांचा लाखो कोटींचा फायदा व्हावा यासाठी खोटे नरेटीव्ह चालविणारे डॉ. संजय ओक व दै. लोकमत चे संपादक मंडळाविरुद्ध फौजदारी आणि कोर्ट अवमानना ची कारवाईची नोटीस.

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 3 years ago

लसीच्या दुष्परीणामाला ‘लाँग कोव्हीड सिंड्रोम’ असा खोटा मुलामा दिल्याचा आरोप. केन्द्र शासनाच्या ICMR ने दिलेल्या माहिती वरून...

Read More Read more about [Covid-19] लोकांनी लसीच्या दुष्परीणामाचे दावे करू नये व लस कंपन्यांचा लाखो कोटींचा फायदा व्हावा यासाठी खोटे नरेटीव्ह चालविणारे डॉ. संजय ओक व दै. लोकमत चे संपादक मंडळाविरुद्ध फौजदारी आणि कोर्ट अवमानना ची कारवाईची नोटीस.

सुप्रीम कोर्ट का बड़ा आदेश: बॉम्बे हाई कोर्ट को निलेश ओझा मामले में सभी मुद्दों पर फैसला करने का निर्देश

• Contempt Petition

सुप्रीम कोर्ट का बड़ा आदेश: बॉम्बे हाई कोर्ट को निलेश ओझा मामले में सभी मुद्दों पर फैसला करने का निर्देश

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 6 minutes ago

सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने साफ शब्दों में कहा है कि निलेश ओझा मामले में सभी मुद्दों पर फैसला...

Read More Read more about सुप्रीम कोर्ट का बड़ा आदेश: बॉम्बे हाई कोर्ट को निलेश ओझा मामले में सभी मुद्दों पर फैसला करने का निर्देश

सुप्रीम कोर्टचा मोठा आदेश: निलेश ओझा प्रकरणात सर्व मुद्द्यांवर निर्णय घेण्याचे बॉम्बे हायकोर्टाला निर्देश

• Contempt Petition

सुप्रीम कोर्टचा मोठा आदेश: निलेश ओझा प्रकरणात सर्व मुद्द्यांवर निर्णय घेण्याचे बॉम्बे हायकोर्टाला निर्देश

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 15 minutes ago

सुप्रीम कोर्टाने स्पष्ट शब्दांत सांगितले आहे की निलेश ओझा प्रकरणातील सर्व मुद्द्यांवर आता बॉम्बे हायकोर्टच निर्णय घेईल....

Read More Read more about सुप्रीम कोर्टचा मोठा आदेश: निलेश ओझा प्रकरणात सर्व मुद्द्यांवर निर्णय घेण्याचे बॉम्बे हायकोर्टाला निर्देश

Supreme Court Orders Bombay High Court to Adjudicate All Issues in Adv. Nilesh Ojha Case, Negates Earlier HC View that certain issues should be decided by the Supreme Court.

• Contempt Petition
• Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court Orders Bombay High Court to Adjudicate All Issues in Adv. Nilesh Ojha Case, Negates Earlier HC View that certain issues should be decided by the Supreme Court.

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 2 hours ago

The judgment also clarifies that allegations against judges are permissible in law only when supported by substantial...

Read More Read more about Supreme Court Orders Bombay High Court to Adjudicate All Issues in Adv. Nilesh Ojha Case, Negates Earlier HC View that certain issues should be decided by the Supreme Court.

[Shocking] A two-judge Bench headed by Justice B.V. Nagarathna dismissed a petition filed in accordance with the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in In Re: C.S. Karnan, (2017) 7 SCC 1, imposed costs on the petitioner, and made discourteous and intimidating remarks cautioning advocates who in fact had filed the petition as per law settled by the larger benches.

• Supreme Court of India

[Shocking] A two-judge Bench headed by Justice B.V. Nagarathna dismissed a petition filed in accordance with the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in In Re: C.S. Karnan, (2017) 7 SCC 1, imposed costs on the petitioner, and made discourteous and intimidating remarks cautioning advocates who in fact had filed the petition as per law settled by the larger benches.

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 1 month ago

The Indian Lawyers and Human Rights Activists Association has filed a complaint before the Hon’ble Chief Justice...

Read More Read more about [Shocking] A two-judge Bench headed by Justice B.V. Nagarathna dismissed a petition filed in accordance with the law laid down by the Constitution Bench in In Re: C.S. Karnan, (2017) 7 SCC 1, imposed costs on the petitioner, and made discourteous and intimidating remarks cautioning advocates who in fact had filed the petition as per law settled by the larger benches.

Justice Hidayatullah’s view in 1966 in Naresh Mirajkar’s case was binding precedent as being undisputed and no counter precedent available and Now has become the Binding Law of the Land as Nine-Judge Constitution Bench in Puttaswamy (2017) Confirms

• Supreme Court of India

Justice Hidayatullah’s view in 1966 in Naresh Mirajkar’s case was binding precedent as being undisputed and no counter precedent available and Now has become the Binding Law of the Land as Nine-Judge Constitution Bench in Puttaswamy (2017) Confirms

Rashid Khan Pathan Posted on 2 months ago

Now if  a Judge of any Court Violates Your Fundamental Rights Through Words Spoken from the Bench...

Read More Read more about Justice Hidayatullah’s view in 1966 in Naresh Mirajkar’s case was binding precedent as being undisputed and no counter precedent available and Now has become the Binding Law of the Land as Nine-Judge Constitution Bench in Puttaswamy (2017) Confirms