Jegathrakshagan case news video
![[07/01, 16:01] Sekarreporter: ASG concludes his arguments. Now, senior counsel Satish Parasaran, for the production firm, commences his arguments. Mr. Parasaran says, it is not the Chairman of CBFC but only the CEO of CBFC who had written to the Regional Officer in Chennai. [07/01, 16:06] Sekarreporter: Mr. Parasaran says, there were five members in the examining committee and each of them had recorded their recommendations individually. He asks how can one member of that committee send a complaint. [07/01, 16:06] Sekarreporter: Mr. Parasaran says, only today the production firm had come to know that it is one of the members of the examining committee who had lodged the “complaint.” He says, the production firm was kept in the dark about the complainant till today. [07/01, 16:07] Sekarreporter: “I’ve invested ₹500 crore. It cannot be dealt with slightly. I’ve also been shouting from the roof that the movie is to be released on January 9. I applied as early as on December 18 and went under Tatkal procedure too,” Mr. Parasaran tells Justice Asha. [07/01, 16:08] Sekarreporter: ஜனநாயகன் படத்தை மறு ஆய்வு குழுவுக்கு அனுப்ப வேண்டும் என டிசம்பர் 29ஆம் தேரி முடிவெடுத பின்னர், அதை ஏன் தாமதமாக ஜனவரி 5ஆம் தேதி மனுதாரருக்கு தெரிவிக்கப்பட்டது என நீதிபதி கேள்வி. [07/01, 16:09] Sekarreporter: நாளை மறுதினம் படம் ரிலீஸ் எனக்கூறி சென்சார் சான்று கேட்க முடியாது – சென்சார் போர்டு](https://www.sekarreporter.com/wp-content/themes/hueman/assets/front/img/thumb-medium-empty.png)
Follow:
- Next story Justice P.T. Asha refused to entertain the journalist’s application to reject the plaint and directed him to file a written statement in the suit by September 21. She eschewed his contention that the allegations levelled by him against the Chief Minister were merely a statement of opinion and they could not be the basis for preferring a defamation suit.
- Previous story கொடநாடு கொலை கொள்ளை வழக்கை மூன்று மாதங்களில் விசாரித்து முடிக்கவேண்டும் என நீலகிரி மாவட்ட நீதிமன்றத்துக்கு சென்னை உயர்நீதிமன்றம் உத்தரவிட்டுள்ளது full order.
Recent Posts
- It is made clear that, in case an appeal is filed as against the judgment passed in the predicate case and the same is set aside, it would be open to the Enforcement Directorate to take further steps in accordance to law. (SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J)
- adras HC on Sec 48 BNSS Notice*_ *Court: Madras High Court* *Subject: BNSS 2023 + Sec 48 + Arrest Intimation + Phone Call / SMS Valid*
- http://youtube.com/post/UgkxXaLYGLEerwXzHHlR4AncQHQQYrrLc31n?si=E0X1OFF6FZEFcN6A [25/07, 08:50] sekarreporter1: DON ASSOCIATES THE WISE STOIC EXPANDING OUR COMPASS: JOB OPENING – JUNIOR ADVOCATES
- https://www.livelaw.in/amp/high-court/madras-high-court/madras-high-court-refuse-quash-7237-crore-illegal-mining-case-unholy-nexus-delay-trial-542715 [25/07, 08:31] Meta AI: *Case #203: _Madras HC Refuses to Quash Rs. 7237 Crore Illegal Mining Case*_ *Court: Madras High Court* *Subject: Illegal Mining + Quashing u/Sec 482 CrPC + “Unholy Nexus” + Delay in Trial + Public Interest* *Source*:
- BEFORE THE HIGH-POWERED ELECTION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE comprising of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, Former Judge, Supreme Court of India Chairperson, High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ravi Shankar Jha, Former Chief Justice, Punjab & Haryana High Court Member, High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee Mr. V. Giri, Learned Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India Member, High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee Supervisory Committee Appeal No. 108/2026 [Arising out of BCI Resolution dated 19.07.2026 (Item No.
More
Recent Posts
- It is made clear that, in case an appeal is filed as against the judgment passed in the predicate case and the same is set aside, it would be open to the Enforcement Directorate to take further steps in accordance to law. (SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CJ) (G.ARUL MURUGAN,J)
- adras HC on Sec 48 BNSS Notice*_ *Court: Madras High Court* *Subject: BNSS 2023 + Sec 48 + Arrest Intimation + Phone Call / SMS Valid*
- http://youtube.com/post/UgkxXaLYGLEerwXzHHlR4AncQHQQYrrLc31n?si=E0X1OFF6FZEFcN6A [25/07, 08:50] sekarreporter1: DON ASSOCIATES THE WISE STOIC EXPANDING OUR COMPASS: JOB OPENING – JUNIOR ADVOCATES
- https://www.livelaw.in/amp/high-court/madras-high-court/madras-high-court-refuse-quash-7237-crore-illegal-mining-case-unholy-nexus-delay-trial-542715 [25/07, 08:31] Meta AI: *Case #203: _Madras HC Refuses to Quash Rs. 7237 Crore Illegal Mining Case*_ *Court: Madras High Court* *Subject: Illegal Mining + Quashing u/Sec 482 CrPC + “Unholy Nexus” + Delay in Trial + Public Interest* *Source*:
- BEFORE THE HIGH-POWERED ELECTION SUPERVISORY COMMITTEE comprising of Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, Former Judge, Supreme Court of India Chairperson, High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ravi Shankar Jha, Former Chief Justice, Punjab & Haryana High Court Member, High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee Mr. V. Giri, Learned Senior Advocate, Supreme Court of India Member, High-Powered Election Supervisory Committee Supervisory Committee Appeal No. 108/2026 [Arising out of BCI Resolution dated 19.07.2026 (Item No.