Author: kkslawoffices

Asking to disgorge the wrongful gains of approximately Rs 2.84crores, SEBI restrained 6 parties, using social media for misleading tips for wrongful gains, from accessing the securities market and prohibited them from buying, selling or otherwise dealing in securities.

Jharkhand HC, while refusing to reduce the sentence of a juvenile convict, involved in murder of his wife, held that “reducing the punishment of the offender will not serve the ends of justice and essence of JJ Act, 2000 is restorative, providing for rehabilitation and reintegration of children conflict in with law”.

Confirming death penalty awarded by Sessions Judge, in case of a 7 year old girl who was killed after penetrative sexual assault, the Madras HC said, “When the attitude of a man turns into one of a beast having no mercy over other creatures, he should be punished and sent to the eternal world.”

CCI’s imposed penalty of 202 crore and suspension of Amazon/Future deal, for Amazon’s failure to notify CCI about certain crucial details of its acquisition, challenged before NCLAT.

Holding that “disruption of public order, peace and tranquility cannot be understood as synonymous to breach of privacy rights” a division bench of Kerala HC reversed the single judge bench judgment which held that “anything and everything that affects the peaceful residence of a person would affect its privacy rights”.

While dismissing the challenge to CCI probe into WhatsApp’ new privacy policy, DHC, allows FB & WhatsApp more time to file reply to CCI.

Sensing possible foul play at Presidency Correctional Home (‘PCL’), while going through a Habeas Corpus petition, wherein petitioner claimed that his father, who was arrested in a case of alleged possession of spurious liquor, had gone missing from PCL, Calcutta HC, directed WB Govt. to file a report before 30.12.21.

On 30.12.21, the Central Government through its gazetted notification, extended application of Armed Forces Special Powers Act, 1958 in Nagaland for another six months, stating ‘disturbance and dangerous conditions prevailing in the State’.

Madras HC, while confirming the rape conviction of the accused, concerning an incident that occurred 19 years ago, and taking cue from the medical evidence available on record, nullified the argument that, the intercourse was of consent, stating “Mere absence of a valiant and violent effort on the part of the victim certainly does not amount to consent.”

Noting it to be a conscious decision of her own wish, FIR against a man marrying a woman a month before majority, quashed by Delhi HC.