Law Archives - Page 8 of 8

The Delhi HC has issued a notice to politicians and personalities for delivering hate speeches pertaining to the NE Delhi Riots of 2020. The names include Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, Priyanka Gandhi, Manish Sisodiya, Anurag Thakur, Kapil Mishra, Parvesh Verma, Swara Bhaskar, Umar Khalid and others. Petitioners Plea In NE Delhi Riots The two petitioners - Lawyer Voice and Shaikh Mujtaba Farooq & Ors have added two applications for adding at least 24 names as 'respondents' which are pending since 2020. The petitioner Farooq & Ors seeks registration of FIR against the BJP politicians and leaders and the petitioner Lawyer Voice wants the prosecution of Gandhis, AAP leaders Manish Sisodia, Amanatullah Khan, AIMIM's Akbaruddin Owaisi, Waris Pathan, Social activist like Umar Khalid, Muf...

InternationalLatest NewsLawPoliticsSocietyTrending

Ukraine Agrees To Talk Peace With Russia At Belarus Border Amid “Deterrence Forces” Alert

Sonia SolankiFebruary 28, 20220

Amid the Russia-Ukraine war, Ukraine nodded to a talk with Russia at Belarus Border. The news poured in just after the telephonic conversation took place between the Presidents of Ukraine and Russia Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Vladimir Putin. Russian President Putin announced, "I order the defence minister and the chief of the general staff of the Russian Armed Forces to put the deterrence forces of the Russian army into a special mode of combat service." Before this, Ukraine denied any possible talks with Russia in Belarus. The country was looking forward to holding a meeting in Bratislava, Budapest, Istanbul and Baku locations instead. Ukraine-Russia Talk For Peace Is Need Of Hour There are no two ways about the fact that an exchange of serious dialogue can help in reaching a dec...

ArticleIndiaLawNews

Karnataka Hijab Row: Verdict Of Court Questions Essence Of Article 25, Says Experts

Pooja YadavFebruary 25, 20220

One of the eccentricities of the continued hijab ban case is how a secular court has got to decide whether wearing a hijab is remitted by Islam. One cannot fault the Karnataka tribunal to some extent, because it is just following the ‘Essential Religious Practices Test’ laid down by the Supreme Court of India. Courts use this test to see whether a practice is crucial to the faith, so as to determine if such practice is ought to have protection under Article 25 of the constitution, which guarantees the liberty of faith. While scholars have highlighted the inconsistency of the precedents governing this test moreover because of the inappropriateness for a secular court to interpret religion, shall elaborate on why the courts or maybe the state, lack the competence to work out if a pr...