Post

More from @barandbench

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Jul 14

Supreme Court hears the case where it had barred YouTuber Ranveer Allahbadia from airing shows following FIRs over offensive comments made on Samay Raina's show India's Got Latent.

However the bar was later lifted stating petitioners will create shows for disabled to create awareness

Adv Aparajita : Now we find it distasteful to ask for his show. He is calling a few of such disabled to some physical locations and do shows..People like samay Raina is apparently a youth icon. I shudder to think so.

SG Mehta: Our youth has better icons.

CJI: We have no reason to believe that Samay Raina has taken the court for a ride and has brazenly violated the orders of this court. The misconduct is further compounded stating that an affidavit is filed when nothing is on record. Thus we impose cost of Rs 10 lakhs to be deposited within 2 weeks.

SG Mehta speaks about the opening scene of the show, Samay actually hangs a "Nimbu-Mirchi" (lemon and chili totem) on the stage as a superstition to ward off "bad vibes" and prevent the show from getting cancelled or into trouble.

SG: it was very clear what is he targeting or speaking about.

CJI: If you don't know how to mend your ways or respect sentiments of the society members then you have to face consequences.

Read 8 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Jul 9

Sonam Raghuvanshi case: Supreme Court to shortly hear State’s plea challenging Sonam’s bail by the Meghalaya High Court.

Bench: Justices Manoj Misra and Shree Chandrashekhar

#SonamRaghuvanshi #SupremeCourt

Sonam is accused for the murder of her husband Raja Raghuvanshi during their honeymoon last year. She was granted bail by a trial court, which was upheld by the High Court.

Read here: barandbench.com/news/litigatio…

Hearing begins

SG Tushar Mehta: this is a very serious case. Bail was granted on the ground that grounds were not supplied but at the time of arrest there is record that they were supplied.

Court: so far as the supply of written grounds is concerned….

Mehta: it was supplied. Only objection was section 403 was written instead of section 103.

Court: we will consider this at length. We will also see if this requires to be referred to a larger bench or not. There is Bansal’s judgement and Mihir Rajesh. There’s a conflict which is arising between various coordinate bench judgements. This would require arguments.

Mehta: there is no question of conflict. Written grounds are also supplied. It is very clear. Just with one typographical error.

Read 5 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Jul 3

#Breaking

Delhi High Court orders the government's Grievance Appellate Committee (GAC) to take a decision within 15 days on removing a YouTube video by Dhruv Rathee in which he allegedly said that Ram, Seeta and Krishna, consumed meat and alcohol.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma says any disregard of court's order will be taken seriously.

@dhruv_rathee @SachdevaAmita

The Court passed the order after advocate Amita Sachdeva filed a plea in the High Court. Sachdeva took offence to a video uploaded by Rathee on YouTube on March 21, 2026, titled 'Can Hindus Eat BEEF? | Kerala Story 2 EXPOSED'.

Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma appeared for the Central government today and argued that the intermediary (YouTube) should have exercised due diligence, which is to take down the content.

Sharma said that the content uploaded by Rathee is harmful and fissiparous.

"Either Google says they will do it [take down the video] now or my ladyship may pass a judgement based on what the Division Bench has said... He [Google's counsel] should take it down and say he will not permit the such fissiparious content that hurts the sentiments of the majority community," Sharma added.

Read 4 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Jul 3

Supreme Court to hear plea filed by the State of Meghalaya challenging a Meghalaya High Court order that upheld bail granted to Sonam Raghuvanshi, the prime accused in the murder of her husband Raja Raghuvanshi during their honeymoon in the state #SupremeCourt

SG Tushar Mehta: This is shocking. Shocking.

SG: I will just show four pages. Both of them go to Meghalaya for honeymoon. It's a pre determined murder. Wife takes husband to some hilly area.. participates in assault ..he was killed and then dead body was thrown into the gorge. Three assailants brought by the lady and she herself killed him. She was arrested from UP after she absconded. Magistrate says he was satisfied that grounds of arrest was communicated.

Read 11 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Jul 2

Delhi High Court will shortly hear a defamation case filed by journalist Anjana Om Kashyap against Khan Sir and several others for calling her and Aaj Tak “bikau patrakar,” “chatukar,” “dalli,” and accusing them of engaging in “dalaali” and operating a “fake news ki dukaan.”

@anjanaomkashyap #KhanSir

Justice Tushar Rao Gedela to hear the matter.

Matter taken up.

Adv Hrishikesh Baruah appears for Kashyap.

Khan sir's lawyer says he has filed vakalatnama.

Read 12 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Jun 22

[Arvind Malhotra vs High court of Himachal Pradesh]

Sr Adv Balbir Singh: My reply on 25.9.2025 was made and the recommendation was made on 23.9.2025. Collegium recommendation says two vacancies were there for promotee judges . 2 juniors were recommeded. I was interacted with on 19.9 and recommendation on 23.9 without having my reply.

Justice BV Nagarathna: These are matters where on judicial side we cannot say disclose this and disclose that. Merely because you are a senior does not mean you will be recommeded. Once collegium discusses, we cannot intervene. There is secrecg involved also... There is no rejection of your candidature. We don't know what does your recommendation say. It is about subjectice satisfaction of HC collegium ..can supreme court on judicial side ask them look into this and look into that. If this happens then where are we heading ?

Justice Joymalya Bagchi: We would have understood if HC collegium went against sc order etc. but this decision of HC has gone further and has been accepted by the supreme court.

Justice Nagarathna: We cannot ask the collegium of HC to disclose any reasons etc.

Singh: But after my representation the supreme court had asked the HC to reconsider the petitioner

Justice Nagarathna: How can you say reconsideration is not done?

Justice Bagchi: Screening committee gives it to the recommendation body. Now you cannot challenge screening committee order.

Justice Nagarathna: There is no cause of action. In Karnataka, for 3 vacancies, 9 are called.. 3 are selected. So others cannot adopt this mode and manner..

Justice Nagarathna: There is no procedural flaw in this as of now. Even you don't know if the name is dropped, removed, etc.

Justice Bagchi: Supreme court collegium endorsed and accepted HC recommendation. Now we cannot open this in judicial review.

Justice Nagarathna: If it has been deferred.. there is a chance the name shall be reconsidered..

Read 6 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Bar and Bench

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @barandbench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!