Dhoni seeks trademark protection over “Captain Cool”
Recently, Mahendra Singh Dhoni officially applied for a trademark on the nickname ‘Captain Cool’—a title fans have long used to describe his calm and composed leadership on the cricket field. Dhoni, says the report, wants to have exclusive rights to use the name for sports training, coaching services, and training centres. According to the Trade Marks Registry, the application has been accepted and published in the official journal on June 16, 2025. “The phrase ‘Captain Cool’ has developed a distinct meaning through its consistent association with Mr Dhoni,” said Dhoni’s lawyer. See here for more.
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind Moves Courts to Ban ‘Udaipur Files’ for Spreading Communal Hatred
The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind (Arshad Madani faction) has moved the Delhi, Maharashtra, and Gujarat High Courts seeking a ban on the upcoming film Udaipur Files – Kanhaiya Lal Tailor Murder, alleging that it promotes communal hatred by maligning the Muslim community and depicting Islamic institutions like Deoband in a negative light. The petition argues that the film includes provocative content, such as references to Nupur Sharma’s controversial remarks and the sensitive Gyanvapi mosque issue, which could inflame religious tensions. Filed under Article 226, the plea also challenges the CBFC’s certification of the film and cites violations of constitutional rights under Articles 14, 15, and 21.
Read more here.
Govt Seeks AG’s View on DPDP Act’s Impact on RTI
The government will consult Attorney General R. Venkataramani on whether the Digital Personal Data Protection (DPDP) Act dilutes the Right to Information (RTI) Act, amid criticism from opposition parties and civil society. The Act, passed in August 2023, is yet to be enforced pending notification of its Rules. The current concerns centre on an amendment to Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act, which would remove the public interest safeguard for disclosing personal data. Critics argue that this could block journalists and activists from accessing the information required to claim accountability. Officials, however, claim that the DPDP Act does not undermine the RTI framework. “Anyone accessing any information, be it about the MNREGA scheme or data about a farmer welfare scheme, can do it without any issue through the RTI,” a senior official said, adding that the Act only restricts unwarranted disclosure of personal information. See here for more.
Phone Tapping Infringes Right to Privacy: Madras High Court
The Madras High Court recently struck down a 2011 phone-tapping order issued by the Union Home Ministry against a Chennai resident accused of bribery, ruling that it violated his fundamental right to privacy. Justice N Anand Venkatesh held that surveillance, including phone tapping, is permissible under the Telegraph Act during a public emergency or in the interest of public safety. Quoting key privacy rulings, including Puttaswamy and PUCL, the judge reaffirmed that the right to privacy under Article 21 cannot be bypassed without due process of law. The CBI used the tapped phone conversations to investigate allegations that an IRS officer demanded a ₹50 lakh bribe from petitioner P. Kishore. However, the court found the surveillance unjustified, stating that “public emergency” or “public safety” must be objectively evident, not covertly invoked. (see here for more)
Madras High Court Dismisses Plea to Ban Film Reviews in First 3 Days of Release
The Madras High Court recently rejected a plea by the Tamil Film Active Producers Association (TFAPA) seeking a ban on online film reviews during the first three days of a movie’s release. The Court held that such a restriction would be “unsustainable” and a violation of the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution. Justice N. Seshasayee observed that implementing such a ban would be practically impossible in the digital age, where reviews can originate from anywhere, including outside India. He added that criticism—whether of judges or films—is a part of public discourse, and producers cannot expect only favourable responses. The TFAPA had argued that “review bombing” by YouTubers and rival interests often harmed films, particularly during opening weekends, and sought to curb derogatory and commercially motivated reviews. See here for more.
Kerala HC Judge Screens Film Amid CBFC Row Over Title ‘Janaki’
As per the news reports, Justice N Nagaresh of the Kerala High Court privately screened the Suresh Gopi-starrer JSK – Janaki vs State of Kerala at a studio in Kochi on Saturday, following a legal dispute over the film’s title and character name “Janaki.” The screening took place at Colour Planet Studio in Padamugal and lasted approximately 2.5 hours. The production house, Cosmos Entertainment, had approached the High Court seeking urgent directions to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to issue a censor certificate for the film, which was initially scheduled for release on June 27. However, the CBFC objected to the use of the name “Janaki”—a name associated with Goddess Sita—arguing that it violated Guideline 2(12) of the film certification rules, which prohibits material offensive to religious groups. During an earlier hearing, Justice Nagaresh had questioned the CBFC’s objection, stating: “What is wrong with the name Janaki? Why should the petitioner change the title? Give a reason. Do you dictate to directors and artists which titles they should use or what stories they should tell?” (see here for more)
FWICE Lifts Ban on Diljit Dosanjh Amid ‘Border 2’ Controversy
You might know that Diljit Dosanjh is at the centre of controversy after being cast in Sardaar Ji 3 opposite Pakistani actress Hania Aamir — a decision that drew the ire of Indian film industry unions. In this context, the Federation of Western India Cine Employees (FWICE) and the All Indian Cine Workers Association (AICWA) initially called for his removal from Border 2, citing national sentiment and Hania Aamir’s past remarks on India’s Operation Sindoor, which she had labelled “cowardly.” In a formal letter, the unions urged the filmmakers to oust Dosanjh from the movie. However, the ban was later lifted by FWICE. In an interview with IANS, FWICE President B.N. Tiwari said that T-Series had repeatedly approached the union, requesting leniency. He said that “If considering a request is pressure, then it can be called that, …. They were unable to find a different combination of artists for their film. When they showed their incapability, it was our duty to come up with a solution, as it was our country’s money at stake. See here for more.
India Withholds Reuters X Accounts Amid ‘Legal Demand’, Government Denies Involvement
India-based users have been unable to access Reuters’ main X handles—@Reuters and @ReutersWorld—since Saturday, with the platform marking them as “withheld in IN… in response to a legal demand.” X says it acted under Section 69A of India’s Information Technology Act following a legal request. Government officials, however, insist no fresh order was issued, linking the restriction to a delayed block request from May’s “Operation Sindoor.” The Ministry of Electronics and IT has confirmed there was no recent demand and is actively engaging with X to restore access. Meanwhile, affiliate Reuters accounts like @ReutersTech and @ReutersFactCheck remain accessible in India.
Read more here
