Shahid Kapoor and Kareena Kapoor were once the hottest love birds of Bollywood, but something went wrong in their relationship, leading them to part ways. However, before breaking-up, they had hit more headlines than any other couple in B-town. Notably, over their on-screen and off-screen kisses!

Singham Again vs Bhool Bhulaiyaa 3: On Day 6, let's take a look at who won the box office clash.

Ginger VS Grammarly: When it comes to grammar checkers, Ginger and Grammarly are two of the most popular choices on the market. This article aims to highlight the specifics of each one so that you can make a more informed decision about the one you'll use.

What is Grammarly?

If you are a writer, you must have heard of  Grammarly before. Grammarly has over 10M users across the globe, it's probably the most popular AI writing enhancement tool, without a doubt. That's why there's a high chance that you already know about Grammarly.

But today we are going to do a comparison between Ginger and Grammarly, So let's define Grammarly here. Like Ginger, Grammarly is an AI writing assistant that checks for grammatical errors, spellings, and punctuation. The free version covers the basics like identifying grammar and spelling mistakes

While the Premium version offers a lot more functionality, it detects plagiarism in your content, suggests word choice, or adds fluency to it.

Features of Grammarly

• Grammarly detects basic to advance grammatical errors and also help you why this is an error and suggest to you how you can improve it
• Create a personal dictionary 
• Check to spell for American, British, Canadian, and Australian English.
• Understand inconsistencies. 
• Detect unclear structure. 
• Detect Plagiarism.
• Explore overuse of words and wordiness. 
• Get to know about the improper tones. 
• Discover the insensitive language aligns with your intent, audience, style, emotion, and more.

What is Ginger

 Ginger is a writing enhancement tool that not only catches typos and grammatical mistakes but also suggests content improvements. As you type, it picks up on errors then shows you what’s wrong, and suggests a fix. It also provides you with synonyms and definitions of words and allows you to translate your text into dozens of languages.

Ginger Software: Features & Benefits

• Ginger's software helps you identify and correct common grammatical mistakes, such as consecutive nouns, or contextual spelling correction.
• The sentence rephrasing feature can help you convey your meaning perfectly.
• Ginger acts like a personal coach that helps you practice certain exercises based on your mistakes.
• The dictionary feature helps users understand the meanings of words.

In addition, the program provides a text reader, so you can gauge your writing’s conversational tone.

Ginger vs Grammarly

Grammarly and Ginger are two popular grammar checker software brands that help you to become a better writer. But if you’re undecided about which software to use, consider these differences:

• Grammarly only supports the English language while Ginger supports 40+ languages.
• Grammarly offers a wordiness feature while Ginger lacks a Wordiness feature.
• Grammarly shows an accuracy score while Ginger lacks an accuracy score feature.
• Grammarly has a plagiarism checker while ginger doesn't have such a feature.
• Grammarly can recognize an incorrect use of numbers while Ginger can’t recognize an incorrect use of numbers.
• Grammarly and Ginger both have mobile apps.
• Ginger and Grammarly offer monthly, quarterly, and annual plans.
• Grammarly allows you to check uploaded documents. while Ginger doesn't check uploaded documents.
• Grammarly Offers a tone suggestion feature while Ginger doesn't offer a tone suggestion feature.
• Ginger helps to translate documents into 40+ languages while Grammarly doesn't have a translation feature.
• Ginger Offers text to speech features while Grammarly doesn't have such features.

Grammarly Score: 7/10

Ginger:4/10

So Grammarly  wins here.

Ginger VS Grammarly: Pricing Difference

• Ginger offers a Premium subscription for 13.99$/month. it comes at $11.19/month for quarterly and $7.49/month for an annual subscription with 40$ off.
• On the other hand,  Grammarly offers a Premium subscription for $30/month for a monthly plan  $20/month for quarterly, and $12/month for an annual subscription.

For companies with three or more employees, the Business plan costs $12.50/month for each member of your team. 

Ginger Wins Here

Ginger vs Grammarly – Pros and Cons

Grammarly Pros

• Offers  free version
• All-in-one tool (grammar checker + spell checker + punctuation checker)
• Allows you to edit a document without affecting the formatting.
• Style checker (paid version)


• Active and passive voice checker
• Personal dictionary 
• Plagiarism checker (paid version)
• Available on all major devices and platforms
• Free mobile apps 
• User-friendly interface
• Browser extensions and MS word add-ons
• Can upload and download documents

Grammarly Cons

• Supports only English 
• Customer support only via email
• Limits to 150,000 words
• Subscription plans can be a bit pricey 
• Doesn’t offer a free trial
• No refund policy

Ginger Pros

• Offers free version
• All-in-one tool (grammar checker + spell checker + punctuation checker)
• Affordable Subscription plans (Additionals discounts are available)
• Active and passive voice changer
• Translates documents in 40+ languages 
• Personal dictionary
• Browser extension available 
•  Personal trainers help clients develop their knowledge of grammar.
• Text-to-speech feature reads work out loud
• Get a full refund within 7 days

Ginger Cons

• Mobile apps aren't free
• Limited monthly corrections for free users
• No style checker
• No plagiarism checker
• Not as user-friendly as Grammarly
• You are unable to upload or download documents; however, you may copy and paste files as needed.
• Doesn't offer a free trial

Summarizing the Ginger VS Grammarly: My Recommendation

While both writing assistants are fantastic in their ways, you need to choose the one you want. 

For example, go for Grammarly if you want a plagiarism tool included. 

Choose Ginger if you want to write in languages other than English. I will to the differences for you in order to make the distinctions clearer.

• Grammarly offers a plagiarism checking tool
• Ginger provides text to speech tool
• Grammarly helps you check uploaded documents
• Ginger supports over 40 languages
• Grammarly has a more friendly UI/UX

Which one you like let me know in the comments section also give your opinions in the comments section below.

SEMrush and Ahrefs are among the most popular tools in the SEO industry. Both companies have been in business for years and have thousands of customers per month.

If you're a professional SEO or trying to do digital marketing on your own, at some point you'll likely consider using a tool to help with your efforts. Ahrefs and SEMrush are two names that will likely appear on your shortlist.

In this guide, I'm going to help you learn more about these SEO tools and how to choose the one that's best for your purposes.

What is SEMrush?

SEMrush is a popular SEO tool with a wide range of features—it's the leading competitor research service for online marketers. SEMrush's SEO Keyword Magic tool offers over 20 billion Google-approved keywords, which are constantly updated and it's the largest keyword database.

The program was developed in 2007 as SeoQuake is a small Firefox extension

Features

• Most accurate keyword data: Accurate keyword search volume data is crucial for SEO and PPC campaigns by allowing you to identify what keywords are most likely to bring in big sales from ad clicks. SEMrush constantly updates its databases and provides the most accurate data.
• Largest Keyword database: SEMrush's Keyword Magic Tool now features 20-billion keywords, providing marketers and SEO professionals the largest database of keywords.


• All SEMrush users receive daily ranking data, mobile volume information, and the option to buy additional keywords by default with no additional payment or add-ons needed
• Most accurate position tracking tool: This tool provides all subscribers with basic tracking capabilities, making it suitable for SEO professionals. Plus, the Position Tracking tool provides local-level data to everyone who uses the tool.
• SEO Data Management: SEMrush makes managing your online data easy by allowing you to create visually appealing custom PDF reports, including Branded and White Label reports, report scheduling, and integration with GA, GMB, and GSC.
• Toxic link monitoring and penalty recovery: With SEMrush, you can make a detailed analysis of toxic backlinks, toxic scores, toxic markers, and outreach to those sites.
• Content Optimization and Creation Tools: SEMrush offers content optimization and creation tools that let you create SEO-friendly content. Some features include the SEO Writing Assistant, On-Page SEO Check, er/SEO Content Template, Content Audit, Post Tracking, Brand Monitoring.

Ahrefs

Ahrefs is a leading SEO platform that offers a set of tools to grow your search traffic, research your competitors, and monitor your niche. The company was founded in 2010, and it has become a popular choice among SEO tools. Ahrefs has a keyword index of over 10.3 billion keywords and offers accurate and extensive backlink data updated every 15-30 minutes and it is the world's most extensive backlink index database.

Features

• Backlink alerts data and new keywords: Get an alert when your site is linked to or discussed in blogs, forums, comments, or when new keywords are added to a blog posting about you.
• Intuitive interface: The intuitive design of the widget helps you see the overall health of your website and search engine ranking at a glance.
• Site Explorer: The Site Explorer will give you an in-depth look at your site's search traffic.
• Domain Comparison
• Reports with charts and graphs
• JavaScript rendering and a site audit can identify SEO issues.
• A question explorer that provides well-crafted topic suggestions

Direct Comparisons: Ahrefs vs SEMrush

Now that you know a little more about each tool, let's take a look at how they compare. I'll analyze each tool to see how they differ in interfaces, keyword research resources, rank tracking, and competitor analysis.

User Interface

Ahrefs and SEMrush both offer comprehensive information and quick metrics regarding your website's SEO performance. However, Ahrefs takes a bit more of a hands-on approach to getting your account fully set up, whereas SEMrush's simpler dashboard can give you access to the data you need quickly.

In this section, we provide a brief overview of the elements found on each dashboard and highlight the ease with which you can complete tasks.

AHREFS

The Ahrefs dashboard is less cluttered than that of SEMrush, and its primary menu is at the very top of the page, with a search bar designed only for entering URLs.

Additional features of the Ahrefs platform include:

• You can see analytics from the dashboard, including search engine rankings to domain ratings, referring domains, and backlink
• Jumping from one tool to another is easy. You can use the Keyword Explorer to find a keyword to target and then directly track your ranking with one click.
• The website offers a tooltip helper tool that allows you to hover your mouse over something that isn't clear and get an in-depth explanation.

SEMRUSH

When you log into the SEMrush Tool, you will find four main modules. These include information about your domains, organic keyword analysis, ad keyword, and site traffic.

You'll also find some other options like

• A search bar allows you to enter a domain, keyword, or anything else you wish to explore.
• A menu on the left side of the page provides quick links to relevant information, including marketing insights, projects, keyword analytics, and more.
• The customer support resources located directly within the dashboard can be used to communicate with the support team or to learn about other resources such as webinars and blogs.
• Detailed descriptions of every resource offered. This detail is beneficial for new marketers, who are just starting.

WHO WINS?

Both Ahrefs and SEMrush have user-friendly dashboards, but Ahrefs is less cluttered and easier to navigate. On the other hand, SEMrush offers dozens of extra tools, including access to customer support resources.

When deciding on which dashboard to use, consider what you value in the user interface, and test out both.

Rank Tracking

If you're looking to track your website's search engine ranking, rank tracking features can help. You can also use them to monitor your competitors.

Let's take a look at Ahrefs vs. SEMrush to see which tool does a better job.

Ahrefs

The Ahrefs Rank Tracker is simpler to use. Just type in the domain name and keywords you want to analyze, and it spits out a report showing you the search engine results page (SERP) ranking for each keyword you enter.

Rank Tracker looks at the ranking performance of keywords and compares them with the top rankings for those keywords. Ahrefs also offers:

You'll see metrics that help you understand your visibility, traffic, average position, and keyword difficulty.

It gives you an idea of whether a keyword would be profitable to target or not.

SEMRUSH

SEMRush offers a tool called Position Tracking. This tool is a project tool—you must set it up as a new project. Below are a few of the most popular features of the SEMrush Position Tracking tool:

All subscribers are given regular data updates and mobile search rankings upon subscribing

The platform provides opportunities to track several SERP features, including Local tracking.

Intuitive reports allow you to track statistics for the pages on your website, as well as the keywords used in those pages.

Identify pages that may be competing with each other using the Cannibalization report.

WHO WINS?

Ahrefs is a more user-friendly option. It takes seconds to enter a domain name and keywords. From there, you can quickly decide whether to proceed with that keyword or figure out how to rank better for other keywords.

SEMrush allows you to check your mobile rankings and ranking updates daily, which is something Ahrefs does not offer. SEMrush also offers social media rankings, a tool you won't find within the Ahrefs platform. Both are good which one do you like let me know in the comment.

Keyword Research

Keyword research is closely related to rank tracking, but it's used for deciding which keywords you plan on using for future content rather than those you use now.

When it comes to SEO, keyword research is the most important thing to consider when comparing the two platforms.

AHREFS

The Ahrefs Keyword Explorer provides you with thousands of keyword ideas and filters search results based on the chosen search engine.

Ahrefs supports several features, including:

• It can search multiple keywords in a single search and analyze them together. At SEMrush, you also have this feature in Keyword Overview.
• Ahrefs has a variety of keywords for different search engines, including Google, YouTube, Amazon, Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, and other search engines.
• When you click on a keyword, you can see its search volume and keyword difficulty, but also other keywords related to it, which you didn't use.

SEMRUSH

SEMrush's Keyword Magic Tool has over 20 billion keywords for Google. You can type in any keyword you want, and a list of suggested keywords will appear.

The Keyword Magic Tool also lets you to:

• Show performance metrics by keyword
• Search results are based on both broad and exact keyword matches.
• Show data like search volume, trends, keyword difficulty, and CPC.
• Show the first 100 Google search results for any keyword.
• Identify SERP Features and Questions related to each keyword
• SEMrush has released a new Keyword Gap Tool that uncovers potentially useful keyword opportunities for you, including both paid and organic keywords.

WHO WINS?

Both of these tools offer keyword research features and allow users to break down complicated tasks into something that can be understood by beginners and advanced users alike.

If you're interested in keyword suggestions, SEMrush appears to have more keyword suggestions than Ahrefs does. It also continues to add new features, like the Keyword Gap tool and SERP Questions recommendations.

Competitor Analysis

Both platforms offer competitor analysis tools, eliminating the need to come up with keywords off the top of your head. Each tool is useful for finding keywords that will be useful for your competition so you know they will be valuable to you.

AHREFS

Ahrefs' domain comparison tool lets you compare up to five websites (your website and four competitors) side-by-side.it also shows you how your site is ranked against others with metrics such as backlinks, domain ratings, and more.

Use the Competing Domains section to see a list of your most direct competitors, and explore how many keywords matches your competitors have.

To find more information about your competitor, you can look at the Site Explorer and Content Explorer tools and type in their URL instead of yours.

SEMRUSH

SEMrush provides a variety of insights into your competitors' marketing tactics. The platform enables you to research your competitors effectively. It also offers several resources for competitor analysis including:

Traffic Analytics helps you identify where your audience comes from, how they engage with your site, what devices visitors use to view your site, and how your audiences overlap with other websites.

SEMrush's Organic Research examines your website's major competitors and shows their organic search rankings, keywords they are ranking for, and even if they are ranking for any (SERP) features and more.

The Market Explorer search field allows you to type in a domain and lists websites or articles similar to what you entered. Market Explorer also allows users to perform in-depth data analytics on These companies and markets.

WHO WINS?

SEMrush wins here because it has more tools dedicated to competitor analysis than Ahrefs. However, Ahrefs offers a lot of functionality in this area, too. It takes a combination of both tools to gain an advantage over your competition.

Pricing

Ahrefs

• Lite Monthly: $99/month
• Standard Monthly: $179/month
• Annually Lite: $990/year
• Annually Standard: $1790/year

SEMRUSH

• Pro Plan: $119.95/month
• Guru Plan:$229.95/month
• Business Plan: $449.95/month

Which SEO tool should you choose for digital marketing?

When it comes to keyword data research, you will become confused about which one to choose.

Consider choosing Ahrefs if you

• Like friendly and clean interface
• Searching for simple keyword suggestions

• Want to get more keywords for different search engines like Amazon, Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, Baidu, and more

 

Consider SEMrush if you:

• Want more marketing and SEO features
• Need competitor analysis tool
• Need to keep your backlinks profile clean
• Looking for more keyword suggestions for Google

Both tools are great. Choose the one which meets your requirements and if you have any experience using either Ahrefs or SEMrush let me know in the comment section which works well for you.

 

 

What is Grammarly?

Grammarly is a tool that checks for grammatical errors, spelling, and punctuation.it gives you comprehensive feedback on your writing. You can use this tool to proofread and edit articles, blog posts, emails, etc.

Grammarly also detects all types of mistakes, including sentence structure issues and misused words. It also gives you suggestions on style changes, punctuation, spelling, and grammar all are in real-time. The free version covers the basics like identifying grammar and spelling mistakes

whereas the Premium version offers a lot more functionality, it detects plagiarism in your content, suggests word choice, or adds fluency to it.

Features of Grammarly

• Spelling and Word Suggestion: Grammarly detects basic to advance grammatical errors and also help you why this is an error and suggest to you how you can improve it
• Create a Personal Dictionary: The Grammarly app allows you to add words to your personal dictionary so that the same mistake isn't highlighted every time you run Grammarly.
• Different English Style: Check to spell for American, British, Canadian, and Australian English.
• Plagiarism: This feature helps you detect if a text has been plagiarized by comparing it with over eight billion web pages.
• Wordiness: This tool will help you check your writing for long and hard-to-read sentences. It also shows you how to shorten sentences so that they are more concise.
• Passive Voice: The program also notifies users when passive voice is used too frequently in a document.
• Punctuations: This feature flags all incorrect and missing punctuation.
• Repetition: The tool provides recommendations for replacing the repeated word.
• Proposition: Grammarly identifies misplaced and confused prepositions.
  
• Plugins: It offers Microsoft Word, Microsoft Outlook, and Google Chrome plugins.

What is ProWritingAid?

ProWritingAid is a style and grammar checker for content creators and writers. It helps to optimize word choice, punctuation errors, and common grammar mistakes, providing detailed reports to help you improve your writing. 

ProWritingAid can be used as an add-on to WordPress, Gmail, and Google Docs. The software also offers helpful articles, videos, quizzes, and explanations to help improve your writing.

Features of ProWriting Aid

Here are some key features of ProWriting Aid:

• Grammar checker and spell checker: This tool helps you to find all grammatical and spelling errors.
• Find repeated words:  The tool also allows you to search for repeated words and phrases in your content.
• Context-sensitive style suggestions:  You can find the exact style of writing you intend and suggest if it flows well in your writing.
• Check the readability of your content: Pro Writing Aid helps you identify the strengths and weaknesses of your article by pointing out difficult sentences and paragraphs.
• Sentence Length: It also indicates the length of your sentences.
• Check Grammatical error: It also checks your work for any grammatical errors or typos, as well.
• Overused words: As a writer, you might find yourself using the same word repeatedly. ProWritingAid's overused words checker helps you avoid this lazy writing mistake.
• Consistency: Check your work for inconsistent usage of open and closed quotation marks.
• Echoes: Check your writing for uniformly repetitive words and phrases.

Difference between Grammarly and Pro-Writing Aid

Grammarly and ProWritingAid are well-known grammar-checking software. However, if you're like most people who can't decide which to use, here are some different points that may be helpful in your decision.

Grammarly vs ProWritingAid

• Grammarly is a writing enhancement tool that offers suggestions for grammar, vocabulary, and syntax whereas ProWritingAid offers world-class grammar and style checking, as well as advanced reports to help you strengthen your writing.
• Grammarly provides Android and IOS apps whereas ProWritingAid doesn't have a mobile or IOS app.
• Grammarly offers important suggestions about mistakes you've made whereas ProWritingAid  shows more suggestions than Grammarly but all recommendations are not accurate
• Grammarly has a more friendly UI/UX whereas the ProWritingAid interface is not friendly as Grammarly.
• Grammarly is an accurate grammar checker for non-fiction writing whereas ProWritingAid is an accurate grammar checker for fiction writers.
• Grammarly finds grammar and punctuation mistakes, whereas ProWritingAid identifies run-on sentences and fragments.
• Grammarly provides 24/7 support via submitting a ticket and sending emails. ProWritingAid’s support team is available via email, though the response time is approximately 48 hours.
• Grammarly offers many features in its free plan, whereas ProWritingAid offers some basic features in the free plan.
• Grammarly does not offer much feedback on big picture writing; ProWritingAid offers complete feedback on big picture writing.
• Grammarly is a better option for accuracy, whereas ProWritingAid is better for handling fragmented sentences and dialogue. It can be quite useful for fiction writers.

ProWritingAid VS Grammarly: Pricing Difference

• ProWritingAid comes with three pricing structures. The full-year cost of ProWritingAid is $79, while its lifetime plans cost $339. You also can opt for a monthly plan of $20.
• Grammarly offers a Premium subscription for $30/month for a monthly plan  $20/month for quarterly and $12/month for an annual subscription.
• The Business plan costs $12.50 per month for each member of your company.

ProWritingAid vs Grammarly – Pros and Cons

Grammarly Pros

• It allows you to fix common mistakes like grammar and spelling.
• Offers most features in the free plan
• Allows you to edit a document without affecting the formatting.
• Active and passive voice checker
• Personal dictionary 
• Plagiarism checker (paid version)
• Proofread your writing and correct all punctuation, grammar, and spelling errors.
• Allows you to make changes to a document without altering its formatting.
• Helps users improve vocabulary
• User-friendly interface
• Browser extensions and MS word add-ons
• Available on all major devices and platforms
• Grammarly will also offer suggestions to improve your style.
• Enhance the readability of your sentence
• Free mobile apps 
• Offers  free version

Grammarly Cons

• Supports only English 
• Customer support only via email
• Limits to 150,000 words
• Subscription plans can be a bit pricey 
• Plagiarism checker is only available in a premium plan
• Doesn’t offer a free trial
• No refund policy
• The free version is ideal for basic spelling and grammatical mistakes, but it does not correct advanced writing issues.
• Some features are not available for Mac.

ProwritingAid Pros

• It offers more than 20 different reports to help you improve your writing.
• Less expensive than other grammar checkers.
• This tool helps you strengthen your writing style as it offers big-picture feedback.
• ProWritingAid has a life plan with no further payments required.
• Compatible with Google Docs!
• Prowritingaid works on both Windows and Mac.
• They offer more integrations than most tools.

ProWritingAid Cons

• Editing can be a little more time-consuming when you add larger passages of text.
• ProWritingAid currently offers no mobile app for Android or iOS devices.
• Plagiarism checker is only available in premium plans.
• All recommendations are not accurate

Summarizing the Ginger VS Grammarly: My Recommendation

As both writing assistants are great in their own way, you need to choose the one that suits you best.

• For example, go for Grammarly  if you are a non-fiction writer
• Go for ProWritingAid if you are a fiction writer.
• ProWritingAid is better at catching errors found in long-form content. However, Grammarly is more suited to short blog posts and other similar tasks.
• ProWritingAid helps you clean up your writing by checking for style, structure, and content while Grammarly focuses on grammar and punctuation.
• Grammarly has a more friendly UI/UX whereas; ProWritingAid offers complete feedback on big picture writing.

Both ProWritingAid and Grammarly are awesome writing tools, without a doubt. but as per my experience, Grammarly is a winner here because Grammarly helps you to review and edit your content. Grammarly highlights all the mistakes in your writing within seconds of copying and pasting the content into Grammarly’s editor or using the software’s native feature in other text editors.

Not only does it identify tiny grammatical and spelling errors, it tells you when you overlook punctuations where they are needed. And, beyond its plagiarism-checking capabilities, Grammarly helps you proofread your content. Even better, the software offers a free plan that gives you access to some of its features.

A new PwC survey has found that 70 per cent of major Australian companies are planning to enter new joint ventures or strategic alliances to drive growth from the Chinese market.

1. Time running out for Abhishek, Avesh as Ramandeep-Vyshak waiting in wings: India vs South Africa 3rd T20I Probable XIs  Hindustan Times
2. SA v IND, 3rd T20I Preview: India look to bounce back in Centurion batting paradise  India Today
3. India's Predicted XI vs South Africa, 3rd T20I: Suryakumar Yadav To Make One Bold Change?  NDTV Sports
4. India, SA eye series lead in Centurion before decisive T20I in Johannesburg  Cricbuzz
5. IND vs SA 3rd T20I 2024: Watch Live Telecast And Streaming of India Vs South Africa T20I Match  News24

(08.11.2024)

01. Petitioners through the medium of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seek the following reliefs:-

i. Mandamus commanding the respondents to prematurely release the petitioners who have been languishing behind bars from more than 22 years.

ii. Mandamus commanding the respondents to produce record of Board meeting for pre-release of life convicts which was constituted in year 2019 and also produce record pertains to issuance of S.O. 390 dated 09.08.2024 of Home Department alongwith complete list of recommended convicts who are recommended for remission in the year 2024 and also recommendation of Board for pre-mature release.

(08.11.2024)

01. Petitioner through the medium of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks following reliefs:-

(i) Writ of mandamus commanding the respondents particularly respondent No. 3 to hand over the physical possession of plot No. 288/15 Sector-C measuring 44'x60' at Sainik Colony Jammu to the petitioner by executing all necessary documents.

(ii) The respondent No. 3 be further directed to extend the period of 05 years as stipulated in condition No. 4 of the perpetual lease deed dated 18/07/1994 for raising constructions.

08.11.2024 Land Mesuring 03 kanals 02 marlas falling under khasra No. 2549/2406 Min situated at Phagmula Tehsil Pogal Paristan, District Ramban and land measuring 10 marlas falling under khasra No. 2549/2406 situated in the same village along with residential house constructed thereon is said to have been taken over by the respondents for construction of the road.

In the reply filed by the Collector, it has been submitted that the indent has been placed by Chief Engieer, Jammu vide No. CEJ/PMGSY/6706-09 dated 03.07.2023 for acquisition of land in question along with residential house in question. However, it is not mentioned in the reply as to whether any notification for acquisition of the property in question pursuant to the indent has been issued. It appears that pursuant to the indent dated 03.07.2023, the Collector has not issued the notification for initiating the process for acquisition of the property in question in accordance with the provisions of Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act 2013.

08.11.2024

1. The petitioner is aggrieved of order dated 09.11.2023 passed by the court of learned Sub Judge (Special Mobile Magistrate), Kathua (hereinafter to be referred the trial court), whereby the application submitted by the petitioner under Order 8 Rule 9 CPC for filing replica to the written statement filed by the respondents has been rejected in part to the extent of replying the factual assertions made in the written statement that the respondents have been recorded in possession of the suit property in the revenue records i.e. Jamabandi 1999-2000, Khasra Kirdawri, 1998 and Kharief, 2022.

2. Mr. Gupta submits that the petitioner has not been permitted to rebut the averments made by the respondents by the learned trial court with regard to the revenue entries mentioned in preliminary objections.

11.11.2024

1. In this case, the appellant was granted bail on 30.12.2019 by this Court, however, till date, he has not been released because no one is there to stand surety for him.

2. This Court takes note of the fact that even after five years of passing of the bail order in his favour, the appellant continues to languish in prison, as nobody has come forward to stand surety for him. The facts disclose that there is prima facie violation of his rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.

3. Under the circumstances, the appellant shall be released on his personal bond to the tune of Rs. 50,000/- to the satisfaction of Superintendent, Central Jail, Kot Bhalwal, Jammu. In addition thereto, as nobody is there to stand surety for him, the appellant shall appear before the court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Poonch once in every month, commencing from 18.11.2024 and thereafter, on such dates as set by the learned CJM, Poonch.

08.11.2024

01. Impugned in this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is an order of Central Administrative Tribunal ["The Tribunal'] dated 04.11.2024 in OA No. 61/1175/2024 titled 'Kuldeep Kumar Vs. U.T. of J&K and Ors.', whereby the Tribunal has declined to grant ad-interim ex-parte stay, staying the communications of the Deputy Commissioner, Kathua dated 15.10.2024 addressed to the Director, Anti- Corruption Bureau, J&K and Senior Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, Jammu.

02. The application for interim relief is still pending and the same will come up for consideration before the Tribunal after the respondents appear and file their objections. Ordinarily, such ad-interim ex-parte orders are not interfered with by this Court in exercise of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, however, having regard to the fact that the registration of FIR either by the Crime Branch or by the ACB in terms of communications of the Deputy Commissioner, Kathua in OA will seriously prejudice the petitioner, we deem it appropriate to dispose of the application for interim relief pending before the Tribunal by providing as under:-

08.11.2024

1. Mr. Ankur Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioners, submits that he would be satisfied if the respondents are directed to consider the representation of the petitioners and decide the same strictly in accordance with the applicable provisions of law.

2. The respondents submit that the petitioners' claim will be considered strictly in accordance with the provisions of law relevant to the subject matter.

3. The petitioners' case is that they have been in possession of Government land and had applied for regularization and conferment of ownership under the repealed Jammu and Kashmir State Land (Vesting of Ownership to Occupants) Act, 2001. Ownership rights were initially conferred under this Act; however, by an order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in case titled 'Prof. S.K. Bhalla vs. State of J&K and others', PIL No. 19/2011, the Act was declared unconstitutional, resulting in the setting aside of ownership rights conferred under it.

(08.11.2024)

01. Petitioner through the medium of this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeks for the following reliefs:-

i) Commanding upon the respondents to allow the petitioner to work as Lambardar in view of his appointment vide order No. 145-47/TBG Auth dated 07.07.2022 and also in view of the J&K Lambardari Act, 1972 and J&K Lambardari Rules, 1980 till general elections are held.

ii) Commanding upon the respondents to confirm the appointment of the petitioner in accordance with the J&K Lambardari Act and Lambardari Rules.

08.11.2024

1. The petitioners have sought a direction upon respondent No. 3 to issue passports in their favour.

2. According to the petitioners, they had applied for passports after depositing the requisite fee. The application of the petitioner was allotted file number JM1066761201422 whereas, application of petitioner No. 2 was allotted file number JM1066765476422, whereafter, the said applications were forwarded to respondent No. 2 for verification. The applications were submitted by the petitioners on 11.08.2022 and 12.08.2022 but despite lapse of so many years, the respondents have not taken any action in the matter which has compelled the petitioners to approach this Court.

PER OSWAL-J

1. This intra-court appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30.12.2023 passed by the learned writ court, whereby the writ petition bearing WP(C) No. 3311/2023, filed by the appellant has been dismissed on the ground that the appellant has no locus to assail the order of demolition dated 07.01.2011 issued by the respondent No. 2.

2. Mr. Rahul Pant, learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellant has vehemently argued that the appellant is in possession of the property pursuant to the Agreement to Sell as well as the will executed by the original allottee and being the occupier of the building in question, has locus to assail the order dated 07.01.2011 issued by respondent No. 2 under Section 7(3) of J&K Control of Building Operations Act (For short 'the Act'). He has relied upon the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in "Union of India &Anr. Vs. K.C. Sharma and Company & others" (2020) 15 SCC 209 and "Maneklal Mansukhbhai vs. Hormusiji Jamshedji Ginwala"1950 SCC 83.

1 The petitioner has challenged order No. 214/NRHM of 2008 dated 10.03.2008 issued by respondent No.2 to the extent of engagement of respondent No.4 as Laboratory Assistant under NRHM. A direction has also been sought by the petitioner upon the official respondents seeking his engagement as Laboratory Assistant in CHC, Marwah.

2 Form a perusal of the pleadings of the parties, it appears that a Notification No.02 dated 16.10.2007 was issued by respondent No.2 whereby applications were invited for contractual appointments in various categories at different levels in the erstwhile District Doda. Six posts of Laboratory Assistants were also advertised vide the said notification which was published in a Newspaper on 17.10.2007. A corrigendum to the said notification, was issued vide No.NRHM/DDC/9954 dated 24.10.2007 whereby, besides increasing the number of posts advertised, it was provided that the advertisement of the posts should be read for Districts Doda, Kishtwar and Ramban instead of the erstwhile District Doda. It was further provided that the candidates should be the residents of the erstwhile J&K State and that preference will be given to local candidates. It was also provided that number of posts advertised for the position of Laboratory Assistant would be six (two each) and as per the corrigendum, number of such posts was increased to (12).

(08.11.2024)

01. Petitioners, Mohd Musharaf and Sofia Kouser, claim that they, being major, have contracted marriage in accordance with Muslim rites, against the wishes of their relatives, out of their free will and are living as husband and wife, but are apprehensive to be subjected to physical violence and harassment by such relatives, therefore seeking protection and security cover from official respondents.

02. Heard and perused the record annexed with the writ petition.

03. When two adults consensually choose each other as life partners, it is manifestation of their choice that is recognized under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. Such right has the sanction of constitutional law and once that is recognized, said right needs to be protected and it cannot succumb to conception of class honour or group thinking. Consent of family or community or clan is not necessary once two adult individuals agree to enter into wedlock and their consent has to be piously given primacy. The concept of liberty has to be weighed and tested on the touchstone of constitutional sensitivity, protection and values it stands for.

1 By this common order, the afore-titled two petitions filed under Section 482 of Cr. P. C seeking quashment of FIR No.56/2021 registered at Police Station, Women Cell, Jammu for offences under Section 498-A and 109 of IPC, are proposed to be disposed of.The petitioners in CRM(M) No.386/2022 happen to be the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant, whereas, petitioner in CRM(M) No. 577/2023 happens to be the husband of the complainant.

2 It appears that respondent No. 2/complainant filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu, alleging maltreatment at the hands of her husband and his other family members (petitioners herein) over demands for dowry. The learned Magistrate endorsed the said application to the concerned Police, and on the basis of direction of the Magistrate, the impugned FIR came to be registered. 3 It seems that during pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, learned counsel for the petitioners made a statement that a compromise has been arrived at between the parties. Therefore, on the basis of the said compromise, vide order dated 06.11.2024, the parties were directed to appear before the Registrar Judicial for recording their statements in support of the compromise arrived at between them. The complainant-respondent No.2 has made a statement before the Registrar Judicial on 06.11.2024, wherein she has admitted the aforesaid position.

1 By this common order, the afore-titled two petitions filed under Section 482 of Cr. P. C seeking quashment of FIR No.56/2021 registered at Police Station, Women Cell, Jammu for offences under Section 498-A and 109 of IPC, are proposed to be disposed of.The petitioners in CRM(M) No.386/2022 happen to be the father-in-law and mother-in-law of the complainant, whereas, petitioner in CRM(M) No. 577/2023 happens to be the husband of the complainant.

2 It appears that respondent No. 2/complainant filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jammu, alleging maltreatment at the hands of her husband and his other family members (petitioners herein) over demands for dowry. The learned Magistrate endorsed the said application to the concerned Police, and on the basis of direction of the Magistrate, the impugned FIR came to be registered. 3 It seems that during pendency of the aforesaid proceedings, learned counsel for the petitioners made a statement that a compromise has been arrived at between the parties. Therefore, on the basis of the said compromise, vide order dated 06.11.2024, the parties were directed to appear before the Registrar Judicial for recording their statements in support of the compromise arrived at between them. The complainant-respondent No.2 has made a statement before the Registrar Judicial on 06.11.2024, wherein she has admitted the aforesaid position.

(08.11.2024)

01. Petitioner claiming to be owner of land measuring 3 Kanals comprising of Khasra Nos. 210 (02-00) & 216 (01-

00) situated at Phalyana, Tehsil & District Rajouri, which on requisition has been under the occupation of respondent Nos. 1 to 5 ever since the year 1961/62 and that the petitioner as owner of the land, had been receiving the settled rent for use of the land by the respondent Nos. 1 to 5, from the Collectorate.

02. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that with the coming into effect of the Jammu & Kashmir Reorganization Act, 2019 on 31.08.2019, the State of Jammu and Kashmir was organized into two Union Territories of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, and in terms of Section 95(2) of the aforesaid Act, all the laws mentioned in the 5th Schedule applicable to the existing State of Jammu & Kashmir, immediately before the appointed day were made applicable in the manner provided in the 5th Schedule; that the Requisition and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1968 (State Act), was mentioned at serial no. 133 in TABLE-3 of 5th Schedule which contained the enactments which stood repealed correspondingly Requisition and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 (Central Act) was made applicable. He further submits that the Central Act provides for a limitation of 17 years for holding the property on requisition and on expiry of 17 years from the date of occupying the property under occupation is either to be acquired in view of the law applicable or its possession is to be handed over to the owner.

08.11.2024

1. This is an application filed by the petitioner for grant of bail with effect from 07.11.2024 to 14.11.2024 so as to enable him to attend the wedding ceremonies of his niece, namely, Simerjeet Kour. The petitioner has placed on record the wedding invitation card.

2. A perusal of the record reveals that the petitioner is an accused in a criminal case, titled "U. T of J&K vs Sarita Devi and others" pending before the Court of learned Principal Sessions Judge, Samba arising out of FIR No. 224/2021 of Police Station, Samba. The said FIR was initially registered for commission of offences under section 363 IPC, however, subsequently after the investigation, charge sheet for commission of offences under sections 363-A, 370, 120 and 34 IPC was filed against the petitioner.

(12.11.2024)

01. Petitioners, Ankush Kumar and Isha Devi, claim that they, being major, have contracted marriage in accordance with Hindu rites, against the wishes of their relatives, out of their free will and are living as husband and wife, but are apprehensive to be subjected to physical violence and harassment by such relatives, therefore seeking protection and security cover from respondent No.1.

02. Heard and perused the record annexed with the writ petition.

03. When two adults consensually choose each other as life partners, it is manifestation of their choice that is recognized under Articles 19 and 21 of the Constitution. Such right has the sanction of constitutional law and once that is recognized, said right needs to be protected and it cannot succumb to conception of class honour or group thinking. Consent of family or community or clan is not necessary once two adult individuals agree to enter into wedlock and their consent has to be piously given primacy. The concept of liberty has to be weighed and tested on the touchstone of constitutional sensitivity, protection and values it stands for.

08.11.2024

1. The petitioner has sought temporary bail for the purpose of attending marriage ceremony of his younger brother which is stated to be scheduled on 9th and 10th November, 2024.

2. Heard and considered.

3. The petitioner has been arrested in a case arising out of the Crime No. 15/2024 for the commission of offences under Sections 8/21/22/29 NDPS Act. As per case of the prosecution, commercial quantity of contraband drugs was recovered from the possession of the petitioner on 27.08.2024 when he along with co-accused was travelling in a bus. The investigation is stated to be still in progress.

1 The petitioners have challenged order dated 23.11. 2023 passed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Jammu ('the Appellate Court' for short) whereby the appeal of the petitioners against order dated 10.07.2023 passed by the learned Special Mobile Magistrate (Electricity Magistrate), Jammu ('the trial Magistrate' for short) in a petition filed by the respondent against the petitioners under Section 12 of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 ('DV Act' for short) has been dismissed.

2 It appears that a petition under Section 12 of DV Act was filed by the respondent against the petitioners and others including her husband Gurinder Singh before the learned trial Magistrate. It also appears that the marriage between the respondent and her husband, who happens to be the son of the petitioners herein, had taken place on 29.01.2015, whereafter, the relation between the respondent and her husband and in-laws including the petitioners herein did not remain cordial. In the petition under section 12 of the DV Act, the respondent leveled several allegations of domestic violence against the petitioners and her husband. It was alleged by the respondent that the petitioners and other family members of her husband including her husband abused and taunted her for bringing less dowry and she was even beaten up by them. She has given instances with regard to the incidents of alleged acts of domestic violence perpetrated upon her by the petitioners sand her husband. It has been alleged by her in the aforesaid petition that the petitioners and other family members of her husband were forcing her to bring dowry in the shape of different articles 3 It seems that on an earlier occasion, the respondent had filed a similar petition against the petitioners herein and her husband and the same was withdrawn by her in terms of order dated 07.12.2021 passed by the learned trial Magistrate. After withdrawal of the earlier petition under Section 12 of the DV Act, the respondent filed another petition under the same provision against the petitioners as well as her husband and her sister-in-law. During pendency of the said proceedings, the petitioners herein as also the sister-in-law of the respondent, namely Smt. Rani Kour filed an application for dropping of the proceedings against them. The trial Magistrate, after inviting objections from the respondent and after hearing the parties, partly allowed the said application in terms of order dated 10.07.2023 thereby accepting the application for dropping of proceedings to the extent of Smt. Rani Kour, sister-in-law of the respondent, but declining the said application to the extent of petitioners herein.

Sanjay Dhar, J

1) The appellant/State has challenged judgment dated 07.01.2012 passed by the learned 2nd Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu (hereinafter referred to as the "trial Court") whereby, in a case arising out of FIR No. 116/2000 for offences under Sections 307/324/326/336/337 RPC registered with Police Station, Bagh-e- Bahu, Jammu, the respondents/accused have been acquitted of the charges.

2) The facts, leading to filing of this appeal, are that on 05.04.2000, PW Mohd Ashraf while undergoing treatment in Government Medical College Hospital, Jammu for the injury received by him, made a statement before the police that on the aforesaid date at about 10.30 am when he reached his in-laws‟ house at Raika, he saw a number of people having gathered over there. He further stated that his father-in-law Siraj Din and respondent No.1/accused were having a long standing land dispute going on between them. On account of this, the respondents/accused along with 8/10 more persons had come on spot. It was further stated that the respondent No.1/accused Showkat Ali with an intention to commit murder of PW Mohd Ashraf launched a murderous attack on him with a Pathi on left side of his head which resulted in grievous injury to him. It was also alleged that the other respondents/accused were carrying clubs and axes in their hands, but they did not launch any attack upon him. When some people came on spot, the respondents/accused fled away from the spot and PW Mohd Ashraf fell down unconscious.

1. The present petition is filed under Section 397 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('CrPC') against the judgment dated 24.05.2023 (hereafter 'impugned order') passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge ('ASJ'), South West, Dwarka Courts, Delhi in CA No. 101/2021 titled Satish Kumar Jain vs. Jugal Kishore & Anr.

2. By impugned order, the learned ASJ dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment dated 07.03.2020 and order on sentence dated 28.08.2021, passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate ('MM'), Dwarka Courts, Delhi whereby the petitioner was convicted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('NI Act').

1. The present Petitions under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ('A&C Act') have been filed by the Petitioner seeking appointment of an independent sole arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes which have arisen between the parties from work order dated 03.09.2014.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts leading to the filing of the present petitions are that:-

a. It is stated that the work order bearing No.JMD/SUBURIO- 67/FW/JKR/LOI/01, dated 03.09.2014 was issued by the Respondent in favour of the Petitioner herein for design, manufacture, supply, installation, testing, commissioning and handing over of Fire-Fighting system at JMD SUBURIO, Sector- 67, Sohna Road, Gurgaon, Haryana, for total consideration of Rs.1,69,51,000/-.

1. By the present petition, the petitioner challenges the proceedings in Complaint Case No. 476576/2016 filed by the respondent under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 ('NI Act').

2. The complaint was filed alleging that the petitioner and other co-accused persons, acting on behalf of the accused company namely M/s Fresco Foods Pvt. Ltd., entered into an agreement dated 12.03.2009 with the complainant whereby the respondent disbursed a sum of ₹1,60,00,000/- as a venture capital amount to the accused. This venture capital assistance was refundable upon the full repayment of the term loan. It is the case of the respondent that the accused undertook that in the event of the venture capital amount not being refunded on the same date as that of the repayment of the term loan from the bank, the same would attract interest at the same rate as that being charged by the bank for the term loan.

1. Petitioner has approached this Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 („A&C Act') challenging the Order dated 13.05.2023, by which an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC filed on behalf of the Claimant (Petitioner-herein) seeking impleadment of Mr. Rajesh Kumar Srivastava as Respondent No.4 in the arbitration proceedings has been dismissed.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts leading to the filing of the present petitions are as under:-

1. Petitioner has approached this Court under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 („A&C Act') challenging the Order dated 13.05.2023, by which an application under Order I Rule 10 CPC filed on behalf of the Claimant (Petitioner-herein) seeking impleadment of Mr. Rajesh Kumar Srivastava as Respondent No.4 in the arbitration proceedings has been dismissed.

2. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts leading to the filing of the present petitions are as under:-

TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J.

1. Present appeal has been preferred under Clause X of the Letters Patent Act, 1866 assailing the judgement dated 10th September, 2024 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby the underlying writ petition bearing W.P.(C) 12165/2024 filed by the appellant was dismissed. The appellant also seeks quashing of the NEET Disability Certificate issued by respondent no.2 as well as the Medical Report of the AIIMS, New Delhi dated 6th September, 15:01:10 2024; and prays for declaring the appellant eligible to pursue medical courses and allowing him to take part in the ongoing counselling process. Alternatively, the appellant seeks re-evaluation and re-assessment of his suitability to pursue MBBS course notwithstanding the impugned Regulations. A challenge is also made to Footnote 3 to Appendix H-1 to the Competency Based Medical Education Curriculum (CBME) Regulations, 2023 being ultra vires Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, 1950 and violative of the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016, along with directions to the respondent no.1 to issue fresh Regulations/Guidelines in this respect.

CM(M) 84/2024

1. The Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner, to challenge the Order dated 06.12.2023 of the learned Tribunal, dismissing the Application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 („CPC‟ hereinafter), of the M/s Shiv Probuild Pvt. Ltd./Registered Owner of the offending vehicle, to implead M/S. Kundu Nirman as a party.

2. The offending vehicle i.e. APOLLO make HIDROSTATIC PAVER FINISHER MODE of which the petitioner is the registered owner bearing No. 6H 3301/1200001, was handed over to the Respondent, M/s Kundu Nirman, pursuant to a Work Order dated 01.06.2022, on the specified terms and conditions. The Respondent being the contractor of Pubic Works Department („PWD‟ hereinafter), was carrying out the assigned work of strengthening and construction of the road, when the accident occurred involving this vehicle on 25.06.2022 at about 12:30 a.m., resulting in death of Mr. Rajesh. FIR No. 172/2022 under Section 279/304A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 („IPC‟ hereinafter) read with Sections 3/181, 146/196, 39/192, 134/187, 66/192 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 („M.V. Act‟ hereinafter) was registered at Police Station, Roop Nagar, Delhi.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode.

2. The present CRL. MC. 4315/2023 filed by the Petitioner - Mr. Sanjeev Kumar under Section 482 of CrPC, arises out of a complaint being CT No. 2592/2018 filed by the Petitioner before the ld. CMM, South, Saket Courts, against his wife - Ms. Alka Singh and her family including her father- Mr. Viri Singh, her mother - Ms. Amar Kaur, her brother - Mr. Akhilesh Singh and her brother-in-law - Mr. Praveen Kumar.

1. The present appeals have been filed by the appellants against the judgment of conviction dated 13.03.2024 ('impugned judgment') passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge ('ASJ'), Karkardooma Courts, New Delhi and order on sentence dated 08.05.2024 ('impugned order on sentence') in case arising out of FIR No. 302/2011 registered at Police Station Seema Puri for offences under Sections 302/308/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC').

2. The appellants, by the impugned judgment, were convicted for the offences under Sections 323/304(II)/308/34 of the Indian Penal Code. A tabular statement of the conviction rendered and the sentence imposed by the learned ASJ on the appellants is reproduced below from the impugned judgment. All the sentences were to run concurrently.

1. The present appeals have been filed by the appellants against the judgment of conviction dated 13.03.2024 ('impugned judgment') passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge ('ASJ'), Karkardooma Courts, New Delhi and order on sentence dated 08.05.2024 ('impugned order on sentence') in case arising out of FIR No. 302/2011 registered at Police Station Seema Puri for offences under Sections 302/308/323/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ('IPC').

2. The appellants, by the impugned judgment, were convicted for the offences under Sections 323/304(II)/308/34 of the Indian Penal Code. A tabular statement of the conviction rendered and the sentence imposed by the learned ASJ on the appellants is reproduced below from the impugned judgment. All the sentences were to run concurrently.

1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. This application, for grant of anticipatory bail, arises out of Simri PS case no. 79 of 2024, disclosing offences punishable under Sections 341, 323, 354(D), 509, 504, 506 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution story, as per the First Information Report, is that petitioner was teasing and stalking the informant for the last two years and when the informant protested, the petitioner threatened to make her photograph viral on the social media. On 17.04.2024, while the informant was going towards the house of her friend, petitioner and his friend followed her and made vulgar comments and upon protest, they assaulted her brutally. It has further been alleged that on 21.04.2024 in the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.70435 of 2024(2) dt.11-11-2024 morning, the petitioner along with other accused persons armed with lathi, danda and sharp cutting weapon came at the door of the informant and assaulted her family members.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State.

2. Petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with Bihpur P.S. Case No.47 of 2024, registered for the offence punishable u/s 147, 148, 149, 447, 385, 387, 307, 504, 506 of IPC and 27 of Arms Act.

3. Allegedly, petitioner along with some known and unknown co-accused persons came to the informant's house and started abusing for demand of extortion. It is further alleged that the petitioner along with one another co-accused started firing with the intention to create fear.