Bar Council of India Removes 107 Fake Advocates from Delhi Roll to Uphold Legal Integrity

Image
Bar Council of India Removes 107 Fake Advocates from  Delhi Roll to Uphold Legal Integrity The Bar Council of India (BCI) has taken decisive action in a sweeping initiative aimed at maintaining the integrity of the legal profession by removing 107 fake advocates  from the Roll of Advocates in Delhi  between 2019 and October 2024. This step comes as part of the BCI's rigorous verification process to ensure that only qualified, genuinely practising advocates remain in the profession, ultimately upholding public trust in the legal system. Strengthened Verification Framework Under Rule 32 This effort falls under Rule 32 of the Bar Council of India Certificate and Place of Practice (Verification) Rules, 2015 . The BCI  amended Rule 32 on June 23, 2023 , which empowered the BCI to verify, identify, and systematically remove unqualified and fake advocates from the Roll. The rule amendment has made the process of weeding out non-compliant individuals significantly more efficient. Accordi

Haryana Judiciary Paper Leak: Delhi Court Convicts 3, Acquits 6

Haryana Judiciary Paper Leak: Delhi Court Convicts 3, Acquits 6


In a significant development, the Rouse Avenue Court of Delhi has convicted three individuals, including the former Registrar (Recruitment) of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, in the 2017 Haryana Civil Service (Judicial Branch) examination paper leak case. 


Conviction Details

The convicted individuals are Dr. Balwinder Kumar Sharma, the former Registrar, and two aspirants, Sunita and Sushila. Dr. Sharma and Sunita received a sentence of five years in prison. Additionally, Sharma was fined ₹1,50,000, while Sunita faced a fine of ₹60,000. Sushila was released based on the period already served but was fined ₹10,000.


Charges and Offenses

The court found Dr. Sharma and Sunita guilty under Sections 120B (criminal conspiracy), 409 (criminal breach of trust by a public servant), 411 (dishonestly receiving stolen property) of the IPC, and Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act). Sushila was convicted under Section 411 of the IPC. However, the court acquitted six other accused due to insufficient evidence.


The Case Background

The case pertains to the alleged leakage of the 2017 Haryana Civil Services (Judicial Branch) Preliminary Examination paper. The matter was initially investigated by the Punjab and Haryana High Court and later transferred to Delhi by the Supreme Court in February 2021.


Court Observations

The court emphasized that paper leaks have severe consequences, including damaging public trust and affecting the fairness of competitive exams. It highlighted the need for stringent laws to tackle such malpractices and restore faith in the examination process. The court appreciated the notification of the Public Examination (Prevention of Unfair Means) Act 2024 but called for long-term reforms to ensure transparency.


Defense and Prosecution Arguments

During the trial, the defense argued that the examination papers were under the possession of the High Court Committee, and the allegations against Dr. Sharma were unfounded. However, the prosecution, led by Special Public Prosecutor Charanjit Singh Bakhshi, presented a strong case, establishing that the question paper was leaked by Dr. Sharma and shared by Sunita with other candidates for illegal gratification.


Implications of the Verdict

This ruling serves as a reminder of the need for integrity in public examinations and the importance of upholding justice. The case has also led to calls for more stringent measures to prevent such incidents in the future.


The matter continues to highlight the challenges in maintaining the sanctity of competitive exams in India.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Evolution of Constitution under Article 14 to 18

Legal Proceedings Initiated Against Former Jharkhand CM Hemant Soren

Equality Before Law