Delhi High Court to hear plea seeking directions to Twitter to appoint a Resident Grievance Officer as mandated under Rule 4 of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021
Court points out that only interim Grievance Officer was appointed by Twitter. It is not fair, Mr Poovayya. When a Senior Counsel makes a statement, I take it seriously: Justice Rekha Palli
There is no Grievance Officer, Nodal Officer as on date. Petitioner's grievance was that two tweets needed to be pulled down. Twitter has said that it is unable to conclude that the tweets were defamatory: Poovayya
I want to deal with the first prayer regarding appointment of Grievance Officer. If he was removed on June 21, Twitter was expected to appoint another officer: Justice Palli
After 21 June, till July 6, the least you could have done was appoint another person. How long does your process take. If Twitter thinks it can take as long it wants in our country, I will not allow that: Justice Palli
When an intermediary is not in compliance with IT Rules, they lose safe harbour protections. Twitter will be in compliance with the Rules. Allow us some time: Poovayya
ASG Chetan Sharma, appearing for Centre, says that three-month window was given to comply with Rules.
They are most welcome to do business in India. But this attitude cocks a snook to the digital sovereignty of this country
Order: Perusal of reply shows that as of May 31, Twitter had only appointed interim Grievance Officer, which was not brought to the notice of this Court. Sr Adv Poovayya says Twitter is in the process of appointing a Grievance Officer
Order: But when asked when this appointment would be made, learned counsel sought time to obtain full instructions as time zone of company is in San Francisco.
We are here to bid farewell to one of the most humanitarian judges who did not let go of any opportunity to extend help, one of the most humane judges, Advocate Abhijat says.
Karnataka High Court to hear plea by Twitter's Manish Maheshwari challenging notice issued to him by Uttar Pradesh Police under Section 41A CrPC over tweets on Ghaziabad assault video
#SupremeCourt hears plea seeking to consider goods and services at par.
Adv: raises a point which will benefit lakhs and lakhs of consumers
Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul: High Court can examine it in detail
Adv: HC does not have the power to issue directions under Article 142
Justice Hemant Gupta: how can the service provided by a doctor be equated with that of a good?
Advocate Hemant Gupta: The court has held it in a number of judgments. Legislature in 1986 services were given greater scope and goods were given lesser
Adv Gupta: The horizon of services was expanded by an amendment. There was a further amendment brought them at par
Justice Kaul: what are you challenging?
Adv Gupta: from 2003 goods and services are at par. but because of typographical error it is not at par
Allahabad High Court (Lucknow Bench) shortly to hear a plea for quashing of FIR by UP police against Gareeb Nawaz Masjid Committee Secretary in relation to report by the @thewire_in on Masjid demolition.
Advocate Tripathi: This a case, where my clients gave an interview to a news portal, @thewire_in and FIR was registered against them. It is submitted that all the charges under 153A and other connected charges are unsustainable.
#SupremeCourt bench led by CJI NV Ramana to hear a plea by a doctor turned spiritual practitioner seeking the release of a 21-year-old woman, who he claimed was his “spiritual live-in partner,” from the “illegal custody” of her parents and family.
CJI SA Bobde led bench had earlier allowed the petitioner to approach the High Court so as to get a conclusive finding on whether or not there is illegal detention. #supremecourt#habeascorpus