Updated: May 28
Gangavath Ekitha | Shubhi Rathore | Edited by Prabhat Bandhulya
DELHI HIGH COURT DISCOURAGED AT CONVICT NOT ATTAINMENT RELASE DESPITE BAIL DUE TO DELAY IN AGE VERIFICATION BY POLOICE:
On May 23, the District judge granted bail here to the accused on the deal that he provides a sense of certainty of Rs 25,000. If the defendant would not be able to provide the surety, resulting in the accused remaining in jail. In such conditions, the accused filed a petition the Delhi High Court for contempt. The Authorities informed the Court that the age verification is taking some time because the defendant is from Bihar and school records must be verified to determine the age. Also, it was told that it was difficult to do this work when they knew that the school was situated in small village.
Delhi High Court Seeks Delhi Police's Response on Bail Plea of Accused of Jahangir violence
The Delhi High Court on Friday decided to seek the urban police's reply to a bail petition filed through one Babuddin, an alleged in regards to confrontations that emerged last month in the city's Jahangirpuri area throughout a Hanuman Jayanti procession. A single judge bench headed by Justice Yogesh Khanna posted a notice just on bail petition, which questioned the Trial Court's order denying the alleged bail with in case.The FIR was filed in accordance with sections 147, 148, 149, 186, 353, 332, 323, 427, 436, 307, and 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code, as well as section 27 of the Arms Act. Babuddin has been in judicial detention since April 27. As a result, the entire story about the state's case Applicant is faked and false, according the plea. This same plea also asserts that the suspect had no connection with co-accused Ansar and also that the prosecution failed to generate material information to substantiate the association. According to the plea, the Trial Court also failed to take into account the fact that the accused's place was near his store or home, which did not even fall in the trail of the procession.
Delhi HC refers Trademark Coke Studio case to Mediation
The suit is filed by Nikhil Chawla, Proprietor of “The Chawla Group” against “The Coca Cola Company”.The suit falls under Section 142 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 and the plaintiff seeks the remedy of declaration of non-infringement of the registered trademark COKE STUDIO.The plaintiff contends that his online platform that is known by the name of ‘COOK STUDIO’ is related to cooking and in no way infringes the trademark of the defendants i.e; ‘COKE STUDIO’
The plaintiff informed the court that he has received notices from the defendant to stop using the mark COOK STUDIO. Plaintiffs Counsel also contended that the colour combination and logos are completely different from each other and hence creates no confusion.
The Court, after hearing the contention,was of the view that there is a chance to sort this issue amicably and hence, the matter is referred to mediation