In major rejig, 135 trial court judges transferred in Delhi
Among notable names are Additional Sessions Judge Sameer Bajpai of Karkardooma Courts, who was hearing the larger conspiracy case related to the 2020 Northeast Delhi Riots, and Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala of Karkardooma Courts who was hearing other cases of murder, arson, and unlawful assembly linked to the riots.
While the former had been transferred to the Saket Court as an Additional Sessions Judge, the latter has been transferred to the Patiala House Court as a District Judge (Commercial Court). The larger conspiracy case has been pending for over four years and is at the stage of framing charges.
Special Judge Niyay Bindu of Delhi's Rouse Avenue Court has been transferred to the Dwarka Court in the capacity of an Additional Principal Judge (Family Court). In June 2024, she granted bail to former Delhi CM Arvind Kejriwal in the money laundering case linked to the excise policy 'scam'.
Additional Sessions Judge (POCSO) Gomati Manocha of Patiala House Court, who recently accepted a closure report filed by the Delhi Police in a POCSO case against former BJP MP Brij Bhushan, has been transferred to Karkardooma Court as a District Judge.
Additional Sessions Judge Manisha Khurana Kakkar of the Saket Court has been transferred to Rouse Avenue Court as a Special Judge. She was hearing the trial against Aaftab Poonawala, who was arrested in 2022 for allegedly killing his live-in partner Shraddha Walkar and chopping her into pieces in Delhi.
Special Judge Amitabh Rawat of Rouse Avenue Court, who earlier heard the larger conspiracy case linked to the Delhi riots, has been transferred to the Delhi High Court in the capacity of Joint Registrar (judicial).
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News18
5 hours ago
- News18
Nitish Kumar Reddy's Old Agency Sues Him Over Unpaid Dues
Square The One, a Bengaluru-based talent agency, has sued Indian all-rounder Nitish Kumar Reddy over some unpaid dues. The case is listed in the Delhi High Court for July 28, 2025. Square The One, a Bengaluru-based talent agency, has sued its former client, Indian all-rounder Nitish Kumar Reddy, over unpaid dues. The case is listed in the Delhi High Court for July 28, 2025 as M/s Square The One Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Director Sh. Shiv Dhawan Vs. Nitish Kumar Reddy. News18 CricketNext reached out to Dhawan, who confirmed the details available in the public domain but refrained from a comment, citing the matter being sub-judice. The talent agency has listed the petition under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. It alleges breach of the management agreement and non-payment of dues. Reddy is said to have separated from the agency last year, ending a three-year-long association. For years, Reddy was a prominent part of the agency's social media campaigns. However, since December, he hasn't featured there at all. Talent agencies are a big part of the modern cricket ecosystem. These are well-connected with corporate brands in India and around the world and work to secure sponsorship deals for players, while in some cases, also handling their off-field needs like social media image, events, public relations (PR), and so on. Unearthed by his home IPL franchise, Sunrisers Hyderabad, in 2023, Nitish has become an important part of India's Test side. He played all five Tests of the 2024-25 Border-Gavaskar Trophy, scoring 298 runs and picking five wickets. He dealt with a few injuries afterwards before getting a chance in the second Test of the Anderson-Tendulkar Trophy. In the second and third Tests, he took three wickets and scored 45 runs. However, his tour ended prematurely with a knee injury suffered during training before the ongoing fourth Test at Old Trafford. 'All-rounder Nitish Kumar Reddy has been ruled out of the remaining two Tests owing to a left knee injury. Nitish will fly back home, and the team wishes him a speedy recovery." Shardul Thakur has replaced him in the 11. view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
India Today
7 hours ago
- India Today
Make Staff Selection Commission exam portal blind-friendly: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has asked the Staff Selection Commission (SSC) to revisit its digital policies and make its exam application portal more accessible for blind candidates. This came after a petition highlighted the difficulties faced by visually impaired individuals in uploading live photographs through face recognition, an essential step to apply for several government direction was issued by a bench led by Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela during a hearing on judges stressed that the current system places an unfair burden on blind candidates and must be made more inclusive. The case was filed by Santosh Kumar Rungta of the National Federation of the Blind. In the plea, he pointed out that exams such as the Combined Graduate Level (CGL), Combined Higher Secondary Level (CHSL), and Multi-Tasking Staff (MTS) for 2025 require candidates to upload live photographs via face for some blind candidates, this is not physically possible.'These candidates are being left out not because of merit, but because of a system that isn't built for them,' the plea argued. It called the current portal setup a violation of basic rights under the support his argument, the petitioner submitted 60 email complaints from visually impaired individuals who were unable to complete their applications due to the portal's design. The court directed the SSC to examine these emails and address the grievances mentioned.'We request the SSC to look into the grievances mentioned in these 60 emails. The larger issue raised in the petition will be examined in the context of future examinations,' the bench stated. It added that a long-term solution was necessary, but the current problems also needed quick court also directed SSC officials to meet with the petitioner and resolve these concerns in person. 'There are real issues that need to be resolved. In the future, be more mindful. Come with your plans for future exams,' the judges matter will now be heard again on November 12. The court made it clear that it expects SSC to come prepared with concrete steps toward building a more accessible digital application process for all candidates, especially those with visual impairments.(WITH INPUTS FROM PTI)- EndsMust Watch
Hindustan Times
10 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
HC sets aside board's decision denying premature release to 1993 plane hijack convict
New Delhi, The Delhi High Court has set aside a decision of sentence review board denying premature release to a man, convicted for hijacking an Indian Airlines flight with 192 passengers in 1993. HC sets aside board's decision denying premature release to 1993 plane hijack convict Justice Sanjeev Narula remanded back the matter to the sentence review board fir a fresh consideration and asked it to give its decision within eight weeks. "It is evident that the impugned decision of the SRB suffers from inadequacy of reasoning and non-consideration of relevant materials, including judicial observations bearing upon the petitioner's conduct and reformation. Thus, the said decision cannot be sustained," the high court said in its July 7 order. The court noted that convict Hari Singh's conduct in jail indicated elements of reformation. Singh was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment for the offences under Section 4 of the Anti-Hijacking Act and Sections 353, 365 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. He was convicted by the trial court in 2001. His appeal was rejected by the high court in 2011, and the special leave petition was withdrawn from the Supreme Court. It was his case that his name was periodically taken up for consideration of premature release by the SRB but it was consistently rejected on the ground of gravity of the offence. As of May 12, Singh had undergone 17 years, 11 months and six days of actual imprisonment and 22 years, six months and 20 days of total imprisonment, including remission. Granting relief to Singh, the court said the reasoning provided by the SRB while rejecting Singh's application was inadequate and did not meet the requisite standards of reasonable justification necessary for an order passed by an executive authority under administrative mandate. "Petitioner's conduct in jail does indicate elements of reformation, as even over a long period of incarceration , there is no record of any untoward incident which would indicate that the petitioner still harbours elements of criminality," the court said. It set aside the latest minutes of the SRB meeting of April 24 this year and asked the board to reconsider the case. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
