Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay

The Karnataka government...

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday declined to hear an appeal filed by a 69-year-old disabled woman, seeking probe by the Crime Branch, Economic Offence Wing (EOW), Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) or the Enforcement Directorate (ED) into a fraud committed upon her by her relatives, which lead to the loss of Gas Agency, established by her long years of hard work.

The petitioner advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay says conversion by hook or crook not only offends Article 14, 21 and 25 of the Constitution but is also against the principles of secularism.

Advocate and social-political activist, Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay striving for the development of socially-economically downtrodden people filed the petition to nullify the invalidated election results.

The petitioner AshwiniKumar Upadhyay had submitted before the court that there are severalacts that contain different provisions for adoption and guardianship, which areagainst gender equality, dignity of women and children. He sought removal ofsuch anomalies. 

Highlighting the importance of the Law Commission, The petitioner highlighted the importance of the Law Commision and submitted that the injury to the public was extremely large as the Law Commission of India was headless since September 9, 2018, which made it unable to examine the public issues.

A petition has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking a direction to the Centre to appoint the Chairperson and Members of the Law Commission of India within one month and make it a statutory body.

Petitioner asserts that it is a serious matter of concern to both democracy and rule of law because 43% of MPs have criminal cases against them. In turn, it causes irreversible harm to a noble profession, the public interest.

New Delhi (ILNS): A plea has been filed in the Supreme Court seeking direction to confiscate cent percent of Black Money, Benami properties and disproportionate assets of an accused person and stringent punishment should be awarded to them i.e. life imprisonment.

A plea has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the validity of Sections 2, 3, 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991.