Latest news with #BarandBench
Scroll.in
2 days ago
- Entertainment
- Scroll.in
SC directs Karnataka to act against those obstructing release of Kamal Haasan's ‘Thug Life'
The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Karnataka government to take action against anybody who 'tries to forcibly obstruct the release' of the film Thug Life, starring actor and politician Kamal Haasan, reported Bar and Bench. Taking note of the state government's submission that it would provide ' full protection and security ' for the screening of Thug Life if the producers decide to release it in Karnataka, a bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Manmohan closed the public interest litigation seeking the film's screening. On June 3, Haasan's production house told the Karnataka High Court that it would not seek to release the film in the state amid a row over his remark that the Kannada language 'was born out of Tamil'. Haasan made the remarks on May 24 at the audio launch for Thug Life in Chennai, after which pro-Kannada organisations held protests demanding that he apologise for them. During the hearing on Thursday, the Supreme Court voiced its disappointment with the state for yielding to pressure from certain groups who claimed their sentiments were hurt by Haasan's statements, reported Live Law. The bench said this had resulted in the stalling of artistic pursuits. 'Just because of an opinion a movie is stopped, a stand up comedian is stopped, a person is stopped from reciting a poem,' the court said, according to Bar and Bench. 'You [state] succumbed to their pressure. In such circumstances state has a duty. Simply saying ban is not imposed will take it nowhere.' It further highlighted that 'in India, there will be no end to hurt sentiments'. On Tuesday, the court criticised the Karnataka government for the 'extra-judicial ban' on the screening of the film. The bench had also said that it was the state government's responsibility to ensure the screening of any film with a certificate from the Central Board of Film Certification. Haasan's remarks At the audio launch in Chennai on May 24, Haasan described his bond with the Tamil language with the words: ' Uyire Urave Tamizhe [My life and my family is Tamil].' He addressed Kannada actor Shivarajkumar, who was at the event, and said: 'Actor Shivarajkumar is my family living in another state… Your language was born out of Tamil. So, you are included in that line.' The actor's remarks sparked a furore in Karnataka, with pro-Kannada group Karnataka Rakshana Vedike threatening to boycott his film. Members of the group tore posters of the film Thug Life in Bengaluru to protest the actor-politician's remarks. Other pro-Kannada organisations also staged protests in Bengaluru, Belagavi, Hubballi and Mysuru, demanding an apology from the actor. On May 28, Haasan sought to clarify his remarks and said: 'I think what I said was said with a lot of love. Historians have taught me the language's history… I didn't mean anything.' The film is directed by Mani Ratnam. Among its producers is Red Giant Movies, a company owned by Tamil Nadu Deputy Chief Minister and Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam leader Udhayanidhi Stalin. The film has been dubbed in several languages, including Kannada.
Scroll.in
2 days ago
- Scroll.in
Kerala HC orders arrest of another sister ship of sunken vessel to recover losses
The Kerala High Court on Wednesday ordered the conditional arrest of Liberian-flagged ship MV MSC Polo II for securing claims related to cargo losses incurred after its sister vessel, MSC Elsa 3, sank off the Kochi coast on May 25, Live Law reported. Justice MA Abdul Hakhim passed the order in a suit filed by Sans Cashew India Private Limited, which claimed its consignment worth Rs 74 lakh was lost due to the sinking. MSC ELSA 3 was on its way from Vizhinjam to Kochi and carrying 640 containers, including 13 hazardous cargo and 12 calcium carbide containers, when it sank 'reportedly due to flooding in one of the holds', the Indian Coast Guard had said. On June 13, the High Court had issued a similar order to detain another vessel that is also operated by the Mediterranean Shipping Company following petitions from five other cargo owners who also lost shipments in the incident, The News Minute reported. The order secured nearly Rs 6 crore as a conditional deposit for the release of the ship, Bar and Bench reported. On Wednesday, Hakhim said that the conditional arrest of MSC Polo II would be lifted if the vessel's owners deposit Rs 74 lakh or furnish adequate security in court. The court also clarified that the arrest can only be made when the ship is anchored within the territorial jurisdiction of Kerala. The ship is currently en route to Vizhinjam Port, according to Bar and Bench. The court ordered the arrest on the basis that the shipping company has no assets in India. The matter will be heard next on June 23. On May 29, the Kerala government declared the wreckage of MSC ELSA 3 a state-specific disaster.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
3 days ago
- Business
- Business Standard
HDFC Bank CEO Jagdishan moves Bombay HC to quash FIR by Lilavati Trust
HDFC Bank's Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer, Sashidhar Jagdishan, has moved the Bombay High Court to quash a First Information Report (FIR) against him filed by the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust, Bar and Bench reported on Wednesday. The Trust, which manages Mumbai's Lilavati Hospital, had registered a complaint against Jagdishan alleging financial fraud. The matter was listed before a division bench comprising Justice AS Gadkari and Justice Rajesh Patil. However, both judges recused themselves from hearing the case, and it will now be placed before another bench for further proceedings, the report added. What is the case? The FIR accuses Jagdishan of accepting ₹2.05 crore from members of the Chetan Mehta Group in exchange for helping them retain control over the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust. The payment, according to the complaint, was intended to secure strategic and financial guidance to manipulate the Trust's internal affairs — an act the trustees have characterised as an abuse of power by the HDFC Bank CEO, Bar and Bench reported. In a statement issued on June 9, the Trust alleged that the ₹2.05 crore payment formed part of a wider effort by Jagdishan to assist the Mehta Group in maintaining undue influence over the hospital's governance. It also claimed that Jagdishan and his family benefited from unbilled medical treatment at Lilavati Hospital in Mumbai, and said this has not been acknowledged by the bank, the report added. The Trust further alleged that deposits and investments worth ₹48 crore had been placed with HDFC Bank since 2022, raising concerns over a possible conflict of interest. It also claimed that an offer of ₹1.5 crore was made to hospital staff under the guise of corporate social responsibility (CSR) funding. The Trust stated that this was an attempt to influence internal operations. What does Jagdishan claim? Appearing for Jagdishan, Senior Advocate Amit Desai dismissed the allegations as absurd. 'It's one of the most absurd allegations that he received money from trustees. The absurdity of the allegation is that he allegedly received ₹2 crore to harass HDFC Bank borrowers,' Desai told the court on Wednesday. He argued that the FIR was prompted by HDFC Bank's loan recovery proceedings against Splendour Gems Limited, a company led by the Mehta family, which had defaulted on dues totalling ₹65.22 crore as of May 31. 'These actions follow recovery proceedings initiated by the bank against a company owned by the father of one of the trustees,' he said, as quoted by Bar and Bench. Desai further claimed that the criminal complaint had only been registered after the Trust's earlier appeals to the Union Finance Minister, the Reserve Bank of India, and the Anti-Corruption Bureau failed to yield results. 'They now use the facade of Lilavati Trust to take action against us,' he added. Trust, bank spar over dues In an exchange filing on June 8, the bank condemned the Trust's action, accusing the Mehta family of attempting to obstruct and undermine recovery proceedings related to substantial, long-standing dues owed by the family-owned Splendor Gems through LKMM Trust. Following this, on June 11, LKMM Trust and its permanent trustee, Prashant Mehta, alleged that HDFC Bank had not presented any official loan ledger or agreement in court to establish the existence of a loan. The Trust pointed to multiple figures cited in various legal filings — ₹4.8 crore, ₹65.22 crore, and ₹450 crore — as evidence of inconsistencies in the bank's position. 'The Trust maintains that no such borrowing ever took place,' said Mehta. 'If there is a loan, the bank should be able to produce a definitive loan agreement and ledger.'
Mint
3 days ago
- Business
- Mint
HDFC Bank CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan moves Bombay High Court against Lilavati Trust
HDFC Bank Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer Sashidhar Jagdishan has approached the Bombay High Court seeking the quashing of an FIR (First Information Report) filed against him by the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust, a report said on Wednesday. The Lilavati Hospital in Mumbai is owned by the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust. According to a report by Bar and Bench, the matter came up for hearing before a bench comprising Justice AS Gadkari and Justice Rajesh Patil. However, both judges recused themselves from hearing the case and it will be passed on to a different bench for hearing. Earlier this month, the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust (LKMM Trust) lodged an FIR against HDFC Bank MD and CEO Sashidhar Jagdishan, demanding his immediate suspension and prosecution. The FIR accused Jagdishan of taking a bribe of ₹ 2.05 crore to enable Chetan Mehta group remain illegally in control of the LKMM Trust. The FIR had called upon the board of HDFC Bank, the RBI, SEBI and the Finance Ministry to suspend Jagdishan from all executive and board roles with immediate effect. 'An registered under orders of the Bombay Magistrate Court after a seized cash diary revealed ₹ 14.42 crore misappropriated by trustees, of which ₹ 2.05 crore was received by Jagdishan, establishing his direct involvement,' the Trust had said in its complaint. The HDFC Bank had denied all the charges against its CEO when the complaint was filed. During, Wednesday's hearing, Senior Advocate Amit Desai, representing Jagdishan, also denied all allegations, Bar and Bench reported. 'It's one of the most absurd allegations that he received money from trustees. The absurdity of the allegation is that he allegedly received ₹ 2 crore to harass HDFC Bank borrowers,' Desai submitted, according to the publication. The advocate further suggested that the FIR is a retaliatory move, which stems from HDFC Bank's recovery proceedings against Splendour Gems Limited, a company owned by the Mehta family. He said that the company has defaulted on loans worth ₹ 65.22 crore as of May 31. Desai further added that 'these actions follow recovery proceedings initiated by the bank against a company owned by the father of one of the trustees.' Earlier in a statement on June 7, the Trust claimed that the FIRs against the HDFC Bank MD and CEO were not based on allegations alone but were substantiated.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- Business Standard
'Rule of law demands it': SC backs Thug Life movie release in Karnataka
The Supreme Court criticised calls to ban Kamal Haasan's film over his remarks, stressing that films must be allowed release and urged public debate over censorship driven by individual opinions Rahul Goreja New Delhi The Supreme Court on Tuesday observed that Kamal Haasan's film Thug Life must be allowed to release in Karnataka, adding that threats from vigilante groups cannot override the rule of law, Bar and Bench reported. While hearing a PIL filed by a Bangaluru resident, M Mahesh Reddy, the bench of Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and Manmohan said, 'Rule of law demands that any person should be allowed to release a film. It can't be at the fear that the theatres will be burnt...' The plea sought directions to allow the screening of Thug Life in Karnataka, where the film has not been released due to threats from some groups. The backlash followed Kamal Haasan's remark that the Kannada language originated from Tamil. Haasan stars in the film and has also co-produced it. What does the plea mention? According to the petition filed in the Supreme Court, tensions rose after Victory Cinema in Bengaluru announced plans to screen Thug Life. The president of the Karnataka Rakshana Vedike (KRV), TA Narayana Gowda, allegedly warned that theatres would be 'set on fire' if any film involving Kamal Haasan was shown in the state, mentioned Bar and Bench. The plea also claimed that the situation worsened on June 1 when members of the KRV allegedly tried to surround Victory Cinema. Following this, the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC) decided to halt the release of the film. What did the court say? Referring to the controversy caused by Haasan's remark, the apex court observed, 'Just because one has a different opinion, that doesn't mean the movie should be banned. Rule of law demands that any film that has a CBFC certificate should be released.' 'There is something wrong in the system. One person makes a statement and people think it's a gospel truth. Let there be a debate! Let the enlightened people of Bangalore tell why he's wrong, what he says is nonsense,' the bench mentioned. After his film was banned in the state, Haasan moved the Karnataka High Court seeking directions to prevent any obstruction to the film's release in the state. However, the court criticised his comments and asked him to apologise. Haasan stands firm, SC reacts Haasan, however, refused to apologise. The producers of the movie also informed the High Court that it would not be released in the state on June 5, its scheduled date of release. On Tuesday, when the state counsel told the Supreme Court that the producers decided not to release the film, the court said, 'So what? We can't allow this to happen. The rule of law demands that any person should be allowed to release a film. It can't be at the fear that the theatres will be burnt. We are not saying that people should come and watch the film. But the film should be released.' While the court did not pass any order, it directed the plea in the Karnataka High Court be transferred to the top court, Bar and Bench reported. The matter has now been posted for hearing on Thursday.
