The Bombay High Court deferred a 2017 defamation case to 2046, calling it an “ego fight” between elderly litigants. The court said such disputes waste judicial time and delay more urgent cases. The Bombay High Court has strongly criticised a long-running defamation case,

Did Indian nationals exploit H-1B visas? Guilty plea reveals visa fraud scheme. Two Indian nationals have admitted to orchestrating a fraudulent H-1B visa scheme, confirming that the program was deliberately misused through false job claims linked to the University of California system. Between June 2020 and January 2023, the accused used a firm associated with one of them to submit petitions containing fabricated employment details, influencing approvals under the US immigration process.

Ranveer Singh submitted a revised affidavit before the Karnataka High Court on Saturday (April 25) during a hearing, expressing his unconditional apology over his mimicry of a character from Kantara: Chapter 1 at a public event last year. The court, after taking note of the affidavit, indicated that it is likely to dispose of the matter by recording the actor’s undertaking and closing the proceedings. The hearing pertained to Singh’s plea seeking to quash an FIR registered against him following remarks made during the International Film Festival of India in Goa. At the event, the actor had mimicked a role portrayed by Rishab Shetty and allegedly made references that hurt religious sentiments associated with a temple deity. The FIR invoked provisions under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, relating to promoting enmity and outraging religious beliefs. During the proceedings, counsel representing Singh informed the court that the affidavit had been revised to include an unconditional apology and an acknowledgment of the sentiments involved. The bench noted that the actor had also undertaken to visit the concerned temple within a specified period, and this assurance would be recorded while disposing of the case. The complainant, however, argued before the court that the matter involved a larger issue of faith and should not be treated as a routine legal dispute. The court responded by stating that it would issue an admonition, emphasizing that public figures must remain mindful of their words and actions, especially in matters linked to religious sensitivities. Earlier, the court had declined to stay the FIR, observing that celebrity status does not grant immunity from accountability. With the submission of the revised affidavit during the hearing and the acknowledgment of concerns raised, the court signaled that it would formally conclude the matter without engaging in a detailed legal examination.

The Delhi High Court has asked AAP leaders Arvind Kejriwal, Manish Sisodia, and Sanjay Singh, along with Congress leader Digvijay Singh and others, to respond to a petition related to the circulation of court hearing videos.The plea seeks contempt action against them for allegedly recording and sharing video clips of a High Court hearing on social media. The case is being heard by a bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet P.S. Arora. During the hearing, the Court made i

The Bombay High Court has directed the Maharashtra government to pay ₹50,000 each as compensation to advocate Yogeshwar Kawade and former serviceman Avinash Date for wrongful handcuffing by police in a 2010 case. A division bench comprising Justices Urmila Joshi-Phalke and Nivedita Mehta observed that the act amounted to “unwarranted humiliation and in

US Supreme Court to hear major case on Catholic preschools and LGBTQ rights The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear a significant case involving Catholic preschools in Colorado that declined to admit children of same-sex or transgender parents. The case is expected to address the growing conflict between religious freedom and anti-discrimination laws in the United States. The decision could have far-reaching implications f

Kash Patel has filed a $250 million defamation lawsuit against The Atlantic and reporter Sarah Fitzpatrick, alleging that a recent article falsely portrayed him as an alcoholic unfit for public office. Th

Court denies interim relief to Nida Khan in TCS Nashik case A Nashik court has refused to grant interim protection from arrest to Nida Khan, one of the accused in the TCS Nashik BPO case, intensifying the legal pressure against her. The decision comes as police continue their search for Khan, who remains the only accused yet to be taken into custody. Khan had approached the court seeking anticipatory bail, citing her pregn

The divorce case involving Vijay and his wife Sangeetha has been postponed once again, with the Chengalpattu Family Welfare Court deferring the next hearing to June 15. The case came up for hearing on April 20 before Judge Sasikala, but after a brief session, the court decided to adjourn the matter. This m

In a significant legal development, a United States appeals court has ruled that construction work on a proposed ballroom project linked to Donald Trump at the White House can continue for the time being. The decision comes amid an ongoing legal dispute over the expansion plans, which have sparked debate o

AUSTIN, Texas — U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is scheduled to deliver a public lecture at University of Texas at Austin on Wednesday, April 15, 2026, as part of a series of events marking the 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence. According to university

Consumers in the United States who purchased Tom’s toothpaste products within the past six years may be eligible for compensation under a $2.9 million class-action settlement involving Colgate-Palmolive Company. The lawsuit alleged deceptive and misleading business practices related to the manufacturing, marketing, and sale of certain Tom’s toothpaste products, following concerns raised during a U.S. Food and Drug Administration inspection of a production facility in Sanford, Maine in May 20

Supreme Court ruling allows Trump administration to move toward dismissing Steve Bannon’s conviction. The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, April 6, cleared the way for the Trump administration’s Department of Justice to seek dismissal of Steve Bannon’s contempt of Congress conviction, marking a significant development in a case tied to the January 6, 2021, Capitol attack investigation. The court granted a request from the Justice Department to vacate prior lower court r

President Donald Trump announced on Thursday(Apr-2nd-2026) that he has removed Pam Bondi from her position as attorney general, naming Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche as acting head of the Justice Department. In a statement, Trump said Bondi would transition to a role in the private sector, praising her service but offering no detailed explanation for the decision. The move follows reports of growing internal frustration with Bondi’s leadership, including disagreements over high-profile investigations and enforcement priorities. Sources familiar with the situation indicated that Trump had recently discussed replacing her and held a direct conversation about her future earlier in the week. Bondi, who had served as attorney general for about a year, faced scrutiny over several issues, including handling sensitive investigations and political pressures tied to ongoing cases. Despite some legal actions initiated during her tenure, challenges in court and internal disagreements appeared to strain confidence in her leadership. Todd Blanche, a former defense attorney for Trump, will now oversee the Justice Department on an interim basis as discussions continue over a permanent replacement. Potential successors are reportedly under consideration as the administration signals a broader shift in its legal and political strategy.  

The US Supreme Court is reviewing a major legal challenge to President Donald Trump’s January 2025 executive order seeking to end birthright citizenship. During a hearing on Wednesday, April 1, 2026, justices examined whether the policy aligns with the US Constitution and federal law. Birthright citizenship is based on the 14th Amendment, which states that anyone born in the United States is automatically a citizen, regardless of their parents’ immigration status. This principle

WASHINGTON — A federal judge in Washington, D.C., on Tuesday, March 31, 2026, ordered the Trump administration to suspend construction of a proposed $400 million ballroom at the White House, a project that involved demolishing the historic East Wing. U.S. District Judge Richard Leon granted a preliminary injunction requested by a preservation advocacy group, temporarily halting further work on the project. The ruling represents a significant legal setback for former President Donald Trump?

The Supreme Court of India, in a significant judgment delivered on March 24, 2026, has reaffirmed that individuals who convert to religions other than Hinduism, Sikhism, or Buddhism cannot retain or claim Scheduled Caste status under the law. The ruling reinforces the constitutional framework governing caste-based reservations and legal protections in India. The verdict came in an appeal challenging an earlier decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court, which had quashed criminal proceedings filed under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. The complainant, who was born into a Scheduled Caste but had converted to Christianity and was functioning as a pastor, had alleged caste-based abuse and assault. However, the court held that his conversion disentitled him from invoking protections meant specifically for Scheduled Castes. A bench of the Supreme Court observed that the Constitution (Scheduled Castes) Order, 1950, clearly restricts Scheduled Caste recognition to persons professing Hinduism, Sikhism, or Buddhism. The court described this restriction as categorical, stating that conversion to any other religion results in the immediate and complete loss of Scheduled Caste status, regardless of birth. The court further clarified that a person cannot simultaneously profess a religion outside the specified categories and claim Scheduled Caste identity for statutory benefits. It emphasized that such positions are mutually exclusive within the constitutional scheme, and no statutory protection or reservation can be extended once a person ceases to fall within the legally defined category. In its interpretation, the court also highlighted that the term “profess” implies a public declaration and active practice of a religion. This interpretation played a key role in assessing the individual’s eligibility, particularly in cases where religious identity is visibly demonstrated through roles such as clergy or religious leadership. The judgment is expected to have wide-ranging implications for individuals who convert to religions outside the constitutionally recognised framework while seeking benefits or protections linked to Scheduled Caste status. While the ruling reinforces existing legal provisions, it also brings renewed attention to ongoing debates about caste discrimination and its persistence beyond religious boundaries.

The Bombay High Court has reserved its order on Congress leader Rahul Gandhi's plea to quash a defamation complaint related to his controversial remarks against Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The remarks, which referred to PM Modi as “commander-in-thief” during a public rally in Rajasthan in September 2018, led to a criminal defamation case initiated by BJP member Mahesh Shrishrimal. The complaint, filed in August 2019, claims that Gandhi’s statements were defamatory and sugges

Heritage Foods has filed a major defamation lawsuit worth Rs 100 crore against Sakshi Media, escalating tensions between the media organization and the business group. The case was filed in the Delhi High Court after Heritage Foods alleged that Sakshi Media published false and defamatory reports linking the company to another dairy entity without sufficient evidence. The company stated that these reports damaged its reputation and credibility, prompting legal action to protect its brand image

Taliban’s newly introduced penal code has sparked global concern after reports revealed provisions that allow husbands to physically punish their wives and children under certain conditions. The controversial law, signed by Taliban supreme leader Hibatullah Akhundzada, has drawn sharp criticism from human rights organisations and international observers, who warn that it severely undermines women’s rights and legal protections in Afghanistan. According to reports, the penal code