Complete Supreme Court Quarterly Digest 2024- [July To September]

AdvocateAll miscellaneous amounts charged by Bar Councils for enrolment are 'enrolment fees'. Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 519Bar Councils can't collect any amount exceeding fee specified under Section 24 of advocates act for enrolment. Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 519Every advocate is expected to come to the Court in proper attire as per the Rules and behave in the Court. (Para 7) Bijon Kumar Mahajan v. State of Assam, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 449Exorbitant enrolment fees charged by state bar councils violate the right to profession, dignity and equality. Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 519Social capital and networks play an important role in legal career; lawyers from marginalised sections face difficulties. Gaurav Kumar v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 519Advocates-on-Record can mark the appearances of only those advocates who are authorized to appear and argue the case on a particular day of hearing. Bhagwan Singh v. State of U.P., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 722Legal professionals are not immune from prosecution for criminal misdeeds. Bhagwan Singh v. State of U.P., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 722Strict compliance with online appearance marking protocols for advocates - Certain respondents were found absent both in person and online, despite having marked his presence through the online portal. The Court criticized this practice, emphasizing that marking presence without actual participation undermines the integrity of proceedings. The Court referenced a Supreme Court Registry circular dated 30th December 2022, which allows online presence marking only for advocates genuinely participating in hearings. To uphold procedural sanctity, the Court ordered that only advocates who are present in person or through video conferencing should be marked as attending. The Supreme Court Bar Association and the Advocates-on-Record Association were requested to ensure compliance and inform their members of this directive. Baidya Nath Choudhary v. Dr. Sree Surendra Kumar Singh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 645The Court expressed its concern over the increasing number of false statements in cases involving premature release, urging the legal community to uphold the integrity of the judicial process. Virender Singh v. State, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 695The Court underscored the duty of Public Prosecutors handling cases involving Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly in Special Courts, stating that these Prosecutors should fully recognize the responsibilities of their role, which includes acting as officers of the Court. The Court found no basis, as of the present date, to question the competence of the appointed Public Prosecutor and thus denied the request to appoint a special Public Prosecutor. Y. Balaji v. Assistant Commissioner of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 652The legal profession has an important role to play in the process. Any proceeding or application which prima facie lacks merit should not be instituted in a court. We are constrained to observe this because of late we notice that pleadings/petitions with outrageous and ex facie unbelievable averments are made with no inhibition whatsoever. This is especially so in some family law proceedings, both civil and criminal. Reading some of the averments therein, we are left to wonder whether at all the deponents were conscious of what has been written purportedly on their behalf, before appending their signatures. These misadventures directly impinge on the rule of law, because they add to the pendency and the consequential delay in the disposal of other cases which are crying for justice. It is time that such frivolous and vexatious proceedings are met with due sanctions in the form of exemplary costs to dissuade parties from resorting to such tactics. (Para 46) K. Vadivel v. K. Shanthi, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 757 The Supreme Court allows all final year law students to appear in All India Bar Exam 2024. Nilay Rai v. Bar Council of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 734The Supreme Court ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation to carry out a probe into a case where the petitioner denied filing any special leave petition and claimed ignorance of advocates who represented him. Bhagwan Singh v. State of U.P., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 722All India Tourist Vehicles (Permit) Rules, 2023Object – The 2023 Rules have primarily two objects: Firstly, to make the movement of such tourist vehicles across the country through different States seamless and smooth; and secondly, the revenue to be generated by the Centre to be proportionately shared with the State Governments, also taking into account their previous revenue generation, and also, keeping in mind that their earlier revenue income was not reduced in any manner. The Rules, 2023 superseded the All-India Tourists Vehicles (Authorization/Permit) Rules, 2021. After the coming into of the Rules, 2023, the power of levying/collecting Border Tax/Authorization Fee by the State Governments at various border...

Complete Supreme Court Quarterly Digest 2024- [July To September]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Complete Supreme Court Quarterly Digest 2024- [July To September]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers