Current Affairs

DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS (29 MARCH 2025)

by | Mar 29, 2025

Bombay HC on Pragya Thakur event, NCLAT on Google Play Store, Madras HC on police harassment.

Key court rulings: Pragya Thakur’s felicitation allowed with conditions, Google’s Play Store dominance case, and police harassment safeguards in Madras HC.

DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS (29 MARCH 2025)

BOMBAY HIGH COURT PERMITS FELICITATION OF PRAGYA SINGH THAKUR

CASE NAME: SAKAL HINDU SAMAJ vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

The Bombay High Court has permitted the Sakal Hindu Samaj to felicitate terror accused Pragya Singh Thakur at a Gudi Padwa event in Malegaon on March 30. The court emphasized freedom of expression and coexistence while imposing stringent conditions to prevent communal disharmony, ensuring law and order are maintained.

Legal Provision 
  • Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution: Right to freedom of speech and expression.
  • Article 25 – Freedom of religion.
  • Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA): Under which Thakur is facing charges.
  • Indian Penal Code (IPC) Sections: Charges related to terrorism and promoting communal enmity. 

Source: Bombay High Court

NCLAT RULING ON GOOGLE’S PLAY STORE DOMINANCE CASE

Case Name: Google LLC v. Competition Commission of India (NCLAT Judgment on Play Store Policies)

The NCLAT upheld CCI’s ruling that Google abused its Play Store dominance to favor Google Pay but overturned findings on denying market access. The tribunal reduced Google’s penalty, mandating third-party payment options while striking down ex-ante directives. The decision balances competition law enforcement with Google’s market presence.

Legal Provision 
  • Competition Act, 2002: Section 4(2)(a)(i) (Unfair & Discriminatory Conditions), Section 4(2)(e) (Abuse of Dominance by Leveraging).
  • NCLAT Jurisdiction: Authority to review CCI decisions and assess anti-competitive practices.
  • Digital Competition Law Committee Report, 2024: Defines ex-ante and ex-post regulation. 

Source: NCLAT

PRASANNA S CASE: MADRAS HIGH COURT ISSUES GUIDELINES TO PREVENT POLICE HARASSMENT

Case Name: Prasanna Sankaranarayanan vs. State

The Madras High Court has issued guidelines to prevent police harassment during investigations, following allegations by Rippling co-founder Prasanna Sankaranarayanan. The Court emphasized adherence to procedural fairness, requiring written summons and proper documentation of inquiries, in response to claims that Sankaranarayanan faced police intimidation amid an ongoing custody battle with his wife.

Legal Provisions 
  • Section 528, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: Court’s oversight on police investigations.
  • Section 179, BNSS 2023: Mandates written summons for individuals in criminal cases.
  • Lalita Kumari vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh: Supreme Court judgment on FIR registration protocols. 

Source : Madras High Court 

Also Read-  DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS (28 MARCH 2025)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Written By Vishakha Khatri

My name is Vishakha Khatri. I am an engineering graduate and a civil service aspirant with a passion for spreading knowledge about Indian polity. I believe that understanding our political system is crucial for every citizen, and I am committed to making this information accessible to everyone in my own easy way. Through my experiences in civil service preparation and my unique perspective as an engineering graduate, I hope to inspire and educate others on the importance of Indian polity.

Related Posts