WebinarsNew
Deep DiveNew
Explore Business Standard
Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday held that the National Stock Exchange of India (NSEI) is a 'public authority' under the Right to Information Act. A bench of justices C Hari Shankar and O P Shukla dismissed an appeal by the stock exchange assailing a single judge's decision which ruled that NSEI qualified as a 'public authority' under section 2(h) of the RTI Act. Citizens can enforce their right to ask for information only from a 'public authority' under the RTI Act. The bench observed that if the body is owned, controlled or substantially financed by the government, it would qualify as a 'public authority'. The court stated that this was not a case where an entity was established as a private company and was regulated by statute later. Observing that the NSEI could not function as a stock exchange at all without recognition by SEBI, the court said it agreed with the single judge's finding that it has to be regarded as having been "established" or "constituted" by an order issued
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday listed for hearing on July 9 the Indian Polo Association's petition against a sessions court's decision refusing to stay the Centre's May 20 order evicting it from the 15.20-acre Jaipur Polo Ground here. Justice Harish Vaidyanathan Shankar deferred hearing in the matter after noting that a copy of the sessions court's decision was not available with the parties yet. Allaying the petitioner's senior counsel's concerns over digging up the polo turf, the Centre's lawyer assured that no such alteration would happen in the meantime. "You are anyway in possession. Therefore, there is no hurry to tear it up right now," Justice Shankar told the Centre's lawyer. "On 29th (June) also, I made this statement that we are not going to do anything," central government counsel Ashish Dixit responded. Dixit had told a vacation bench on June 29 that the polo ground was being demarcated for raising a boundary and nothing was being done on the turf where the sport is
The Delhi High Court has upheld the Election Commission rules not allowing political advertisements in the Delhi Metro when the Model Code of Conduct (MCC) is in force. A bench of Justices V Kameswar Rao and Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora said ban on political ads for a limited time does not amount to "total restriction" on carrying out business, nor does it violate freedom of speech under Article 19 (1). The bench was hearing a plea by a group of companies with advertising rights in the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC), including contracts for advertising inside and outside trains, and outside civil structures. The petition challenged the January 2020 order of a single judge which upheld DMRC banning political advertisements from being displayed in metro stations and trains while the MCC was in force. Counsel for the companies pointed out that the Election Commission of India had issued a letter to DMRC in June 2019 stating, "No political advertisement shall be displayed/posted at
The Delhi High Court on Friday upheld the Centre's move to temporarily restrict access to the Telegram messaging app ahead of the June 21 NEET-UG re-exam, holding the order was "not disproportionate". While pronouncing the judgement, a vacation bench of Justice Tejas Karia said the Centre's order was "least restrictive" and the government was empowered to direct blocking of access to Telegram. A detailed order is awaited. Telegram's counsel had questioned the legality of the government order blocking the platform. He had said that over 150 million users had been affected by the Centre's action. The National Testing Agency (NTA) had on May 12 cancelled the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (Undergraduate), or NEET-UG, held on May 3 for medical admissions amid allegations of paper leak. The CBI is investigating the matter and a re-test is scheduled on June 21. The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), acting on recommendations of the NTA, had issued a ...
The Delhi High Court on Thursday questioned the Centre's decision to temporarily restrict access to Telegram ahead of the June 21 NEET-UG 2026 re-examination, saying how the rights of 150 million users of the messaging app can be curtailed just because a few of them are taking up the test. The observations were made by a vacation bench of Justice Tejas Karia before reserving the verdict on the plea of Telegram against the temporary ban on the ground that the app may be misused ahead of the NEET-UG retest. On May 12, the National Testing Agency (NTA) had cancelled the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (Undergraduate), or NEET-UG, held on May 3 for medical admissions amid allegations of paper leak. The matter is currently under investigation by the CBI. In a bid to ensure smooth conduct of the controversy-ridden exam, the government imposed the temporary ban on the messaging app till June 22. On Thursday, the Centre vehemently argued before the high court that Telegram has all t
The Delhi High Court has refused to grant regular bail to the former Chief Financial Officer of Reliance Power Limited in a money laundering case linked to the issuance of an alleged fake bank guarantee of Rs 68 crore. Justice Madhu Jain dismissed the bail plea by Ashok Kumar Pal on Wednesday, stating that no ground was made out to give him reprieve in the case probed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. Considering the allegations and the material before it, the court said it was unable to conclude that there were reasonable grounds to believe that Pal was not guilty of money laundering. The case pertains to a bank guarantee of Rs 68.2 crore submitted to the Solar Energy Corporation of India Limited (SECI) on behalf of Reliance NU BESS Limited, a subsidiary of Reliance Power -- an Anil Ambani group company-- which was found to be "fake". Justice Jain said the ex-CFO's claim that he had no knowledge of the alleged forgery and acted only
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday sought the city police's stand on a plea by former AAP councillor Tahir Hussain seeking regular bail in a 2020 Delhi riots case pertaining to the alleged larger conspiracy behind the violence. A vacation bench of Justices Neena Bansal Krishna and Madhu Jain asked Delhi Police to respond within four weeks to Hussain's appeal challenging a trial court's January 29 order that refused him relief. Additional Solicitor General S V Raju urged the court to grant time to the agency to file its reply. Listing the matter for hearing on July 14, the bench also gave time to the police to file to Hussain's application seeking to condone a delay of 87 days in filing the appeal. Hussain and others were booked under the anti-terror law -- Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) -- in the case for being the "masterminds" of the February 2020 riots, which had left 53 people dead and over 700 injured. The violence erupted during the protests against the Citizensh
The Supreme Court has said that an accused cannot be denied access to documents forming part of the chargesheet as withholding them could seriously prejudice their right to a fair trial. The observations came from a bench of Justices J K Maheshwari and A S Chandurkar, which directed that a typed copy of some "highly confidential" documents be provided to retired Major General V K Singh, who is facing prosecution in a case lodged in 2007 under the provisions of the Official Secrets Act, 1923. The bench noted it was not the CBI's case that documents sought by Singh, who was also a former RAW official, were not relevant for the purpose of trial, and the only objection taken by the prosecution was that they were "highly confidential for the purpose of national security" and if its copies were supplied, there were chances that those may come out in the public domain. "It is trite law that an accused cannot be denied access to documents forming part of the chargesheet, including those fro