You may also like...
-
“Justice N. Senthilkumar held, “… the plaintiff has only identified the second defendant with several links to the YouTube channels and other social media platforms. Absolutely, there is no material before this court except the photographs and the links. Merely furnishing the links and photographs will not be sufficient for the court to prima facie come to the conclusion that there is a violation of personality rights of the applicant/plaintiff and in the absence of any specific allegation made with regard to commercial gain to the defendants, the claim made by the applicant/plaintiff seeking an injunction is against the settled principles on the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a).”” https://www.verdictum.in/court-updates/high-courts/madras-high-court/t-rangaraj-v-joy-crizildaa-defamation-personality-rights-article-19-1604292#:~:text=Justice%20N.%20Senthilkumar,19(1)(a).%E2%80%9D
by Sekar Reporter · Published January 13, 2026
-
[14/08, 16:41] Sekarreporter: Justice Ramesh: We are not saying illegal arrest, we are only saying illegal detention AAG: Whatever the nomenclature, ultimately it is the same … Lordship may consider entire scenario. [14/08, 16:41] Sekarreporter: Court: Mr. AAG, sometimes, by deferring arrest, things will cool down … Midnight you have taken (the action). [14/08, 16:44] Sekarreporter: Court points out that arrest was taken after 10 days of protests. AAG: For 10 days we were requesting, we thought amicable settlement would arrive, It did not. PIL was filed, order came, we requested, what are we supposed to do? [14/08, 16:44] Sekarreporter: Court: Don’t precipitate the matter. AAG: If that is your lordships order, I have no option but (to obey)
by Sekar Reporter · Published August 14, 2025
-
Velyathira bjp leaders arrested rc paulkanagaraj interview
by Sekar Reporter · Published November 6, 2020