Allowing his plea, the judge said the court was inclined to grant bail as the election process was still pending and he was the leader of a registered political party.
The Madras High court had laid down very clearly that the Lt Governor had no powers to act independently and that she must work "in tandem with the Chief Minister and the Council of Ministers."
Why the Madras High Court’s actions against Tik-Tok are not in keeping with available legislation and case law.
The incident pertains to a a gang allegedly trying to strip a 19-year-old woman inside a car near Pollachi, a town near Coimbatore, recording the act and blackmailing her using the visuals.
Earlier this month, the court in Tamil Nadu ordered the central government to prohibit TikTok downloads, saying the app was encouraging pornography.
When her miscellaneous petition came up for hearing, a division bench of Justices M Sathyanarayanan and Nirmal Kumar granted time till June 11 to the additional public prosecutor for filing a counter.
The Madras High Court had on April 3 directed the Centre to ban mobile application 'TikTok' as it voiced concern that "pornographic and inappropriate content" were made available through such apps.
Created by Beijing Bytedance Technology Co, TikTok allows users to create and share short videos with special effects. It has become hugely popular in rural India, home to most of the country's 1.3 billion people.
Justices N Kirubakaran and S S Sundar shot these questions while hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a direction to the governments to store water on a war-footing and direct the departments concerned to provide drinking water regularly.
Justice MV Muralidharan made the observation while dismissing two appeals from the National Insurance Company Limited, Tiruchengode, against the award of compensation by Commissioner for Employees Compensation at Coonoor, in two accident cases.
'Corruption is spreading like cancer in our great nation. The common man is absolutely frustrated in respect to the corrupt activities in public offices and by the public servants,' Judge Subramaniam said in his order.
The submissions on behalf of the hospital were made by senior counsel Aryama Sundaram before a division bench of justices R Subbiah and Krishnan Ramasamy.
The CBI Special Court on January 30 framed fresh charges in the illegal telephone exchange case filed by the CBI against Maran brothers and others after a detailed order was passed by the high court.
Justice S M Subramaniam made the observation while disposing of a petition from the Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT), deemed university, seeking to order the state government to allot a further 41.92 acres of land at Katpadi in Vellore district to it.
There were 1,72,602 such cases between 2010 and 2018, according to the counter affidavit, which also claimed that the lower judiciary closed FIRs for not filing of charge sheets by police.
After the EC's submission assuring 100 percent use of VVPAT machines, the bench dismissed the petition.
The court also directed the authorities concerned including the Corporation of Chennai to file an affidavit on the nature of the properties so far declared as memorials for political leaders.
Hearing petitions from the two Chennai-based group companies, Justice T Raja directed the I-T department to keep in abeyance the March 31 proceedings consequent to the demand notices issued on March 2 till the disposal of their applications for bankruptcy pending before the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) bench.
This would enable use of digital platforms for carrying and verification of the documents.
He will be second in the seniority list after the transfer of Justice Huluvadi G Ramesh to the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
The petition challenged the official's appointment as Additional Director in the Department of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj.
The writ petitions were filed challenging the criminal prosecution initiated by the I-T Department against them.
A division bench of Justices S Manikumar and Subramonium Prasad, has already reserved its order on the main appeals moved by Chidambaram's wife, son and daughter-in-law, challenging the prosecution initiated against them by the Income Tax department under the Black Money Act.
The matter relates to the suo motu contempt proceedings initiated by a division bench of Justices C T Selvam and Nirmal Kumar on September 17 against H Raja over his alleged derogatory remarks against the judiciary and police.
A bench comprising Justice Huluvadi G Ramesh and Justice K Kalyanasundaram asked the counsel for the Income Tax (I-T) department to get instructions and posted the matter for September 26.