Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces

Image
Supreme Court Advocates for Childcare and Feeding Rooms in Public Spaces The Supreme Court of India has suggested that the Union Government develop a comprehensive policy addressing the construction of feeding rooms and childcare facilities  in public places. This move aims to ensure that nursing mothers and their children can access basic amenities in a dignified and private manner, reinforcing their fundamental rights under the Indian Constitution. SC Encourages Policy Formulation A bench comprising Justice BV Nagarathna  and Justice N Kotiswar Singh  highlighted the absence of a structured framework to address this pressing issue. The court advised the Centre to propose a policy that could then be implemented across the states, scheduling the next hearing for December 10, 2024.   The apex court emphasized that before issuing formal directions, it was crucial to understand the Centre’s perspective on implementing the petitioner’s demand for childcare and feedi...
Post a Comment

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

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.


According to the BCI, the amended rule ensures the legal profession adheres to transparency, accountability, and professionalism. As a result, since the amendment, an additional 50 fake advocates have been removed, indicating improved efficiency and thoroughness in verifying qualifications and practice statuses.


Supreme Court’s Role in Strengthening the Process


The Supreme Court has played an instrumental role in enforcing this framework. In Ajayinder Sangwan and Others vs. Bar Council of Delhi (TC(Civil) No. 126 of 2015), the court enabled effective implementation of Rule 32, enhancing the BCI’s authority to address cases of fraud and non-compliance. This judicial support has significantly bolstered the BCI’s capabilities in swiftly removing unqualified individuals from the Roll, strengthening the public’s trust in the legal profession.


Further, the Supreme Court’s directives in Ajay Shanker Srivastava vs. Bar Council of India & Anr. (W.P. No. 82 of 2023) led to the establishment of a High-Powered Committee to identify fake advocates and cases of forgery. The committee’s findings have contributed substantially to the recent removals from the Roll, showcasing the BCI's commitment to upholding legal standards.


Verification Process and Increased Efficiency Post-Amendment


Since the June 2023 amendment to Rule 32, the BCI has made notable advancements in identifying fraudulent practices among advocates. A stark increase in removal rates is evident, as compared to the years prior. Investigations revealed that the use of forged documents and misrepresentations during enrolment were the main reasons behind these removals. Some advocates were also removed for failing to practise law actively or for non-compliance with BCI’s verification processes.


The Supreme Court-backed verification process has created a safer environment within the legal community, deterring those who might engage in unethical practices. In fact, several individuals aware of their fraudulent credentials have voluntarily surrendered their enrolment certificates, preemptively avoiding exposure. The BCI has urged all State Bar Councils to exercise caution when accepting such surrenders to prevent evasion of accountability. Complete surrenders are finalized only after thorough investigation.


Collaborative Efforts with Universities for Additional Verifications


As part of this broad-based verification process, universities are playing a critical role in helping State Bar Councils identify advocates who obtained enrolment using forged academic degrees. Several universities are working closely with the Bar Councils, and it is anticipated that the number of removals from the Roll may increase as these investigations progress. Upon completion of these verifications, additional actions will be taken to ensure that only genuinely qualified individuals practise law.


Future Compliance Measures and Upcoming Elections


As part of maintaining professional standards, elections to various State Bar Councils will be conducted only after non-practitioners and those holding fake degrees are removed in compliance with Rule 32. The BCI is working closely with State Bar Councils to ensure that the verification process remains thorough and continues to effectively remove unqualified advocates from the Roll. 


Impact on the Legal Profession and Public Trust


The removal of fake advocates and enhanced verification measures have a profound impact on the credibility and integrity of the Indian legal profession. By ensuring that only qualified, practising lawyers represent the public, the BCI reinforces ethical standards and strengthens public confidence in the justice system. The recent removals, particularly in the Delhi Roll, highlight the BCI’s dedication to creating a professional environment that is trusted, transparent, and accountable.

Location: Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, India

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process: Curbing “Bulldozer Justice” with Strict Guidelines

Image
Supreme Court Reinforces Due Process: Curbing “Bulldozer Justice” with Strict Guidelines Background In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has set out guidelines to curb arbitrary demolitions, commonly referred to as "bulldozer justice." This term has emerged from instances where properties of individuals accused of crimes have been demolished without following due legal process. The ruling responds to several petitions highlighting the destruction of residential and commercial properties without prior notice, which, according to petitioners, targets marginalized and minority communities. Key Principles Addressed The Supreme Court’s decision rests on critical constitutional principles, particularly the rule of law, separation of powers, and protection of individual rights . The Court emphasized that no person should be punished without due process and that arbitrary action by the executive undermines citizens’ trust in the justice system. Justice Gavai, in del...
Read more

Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Former Bank Manager Accused of Defrauding Woman of ₹13 Crores

Image
Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Former Bank Manager  Accused of Defrauding Woman of ₹13 Crores  The Delhi High Court has granted bail to Varun Vashista , a former bank manager accused of embezzling over ₹13 crores from a customer’s account while working at ICICI Bank's Vikas Puri branch. The bail was approved by Justice Amit Mahajan on November 12, 2024, after considering the evidence and facts of the case.   Details of the Case The allegations against Vashista stem from his role as a branch manager. The complainant and her husband had entrusted him with managing their investments, amounting to ₹13.5 crores, between 2019 and 2023.   The complainant discovered in January 2024 that nearly ₹12 crores had been **siphoned off** from her account. Key allegations include:   - Creation of Fake Fixed Deposits: The accused reportedly created fraudulent fixed deposit accounts in the complainant’s name.   - Misappropriation of Funds: Funds were tr...
Read more

Equality Before Law

Image
                            Equality Before Law                                                   Introduction The rule of law was firstly introduced by A.V. Dicey in  his book "The Constitution Of England" in which there is rule which only prevails is law in which all are equal. In simple word if any wrong is being done which is not justifiable  by law committed by anyone that may be president, prime minister, or any individual are punishable because there is supremacy of law. Supremacy of law means the government which is power or the people who elected the government all will be treated equally before law.  Article 14 The Indian Constitution 1949, Article 14 guarantees "Equality before law The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the...
Read more