A Delhi court has referred lawyer Anil Kumar Goswami to the Delhi High Court and Bar Council for his unprofessional conduct during a hearing related to the 2020 Northeast Delhi riots. The judge was offended by Goswami’s disrespectful remarks and lack of preparation, raising concerns about his professionalism and intentions in court.
The Supreme Court of India will hear an appeal from the Rouse Avenue District Court Bar Association contesting the Delhi High Court’s recognition of the Central Delhi Court Bar Association as the primary bar association for Rouse Avenue Court. The appeal highlights procedural concerns regarding the Bar Council of Delhi’s actions.
The Supreme Court mandated 33% reservation for women lawyers in elections for the National Green Tribunal (NGT) Bar Association. A Bench of Justices Surya Kant and N Kotiswar Singh issued the directive to promote gender representation in the legal profession. The Court also allowed lawyer-members of the NGT Bar Association to vote without mandatory registration with the Bar Council of Delhi. This move highlights the judiciary’s commitment to ensuring inclusivity and equality in legal institutions.
The Delhi High Court raised concerns about non-lawyers representing people in consumer cases. It stressed that only qualified legal professionals should handle such cases to maintain the fairness of the judicial process. The court’s view is to ensure consumer matters are dealt with by trained experts. This highlights the importance of following proper legal standards in representation.
The Delhi High Court has scheduled elections for various bar associations in Delhi on February 7, 2025. This decision follows an agreement among counsels and replaces an earlier date of October 19, 2024, which was deferred due to a pending Supreme Court case. Preparations must be finalized by January 10, 2025.
Today, On 9th December, AAP Legal Cell Chief Sanjeev Nasiar challenged the Bar Council of India’s (BCI) decision to suspend him as Vice Chairman due to questions about his LL.B. degree authenticity. The BCI has sought a CBI investigation into alleged record tampering, raising legal and political concerns about Nasiar’s qualifications.
Today, On 13th November, the Supreme Court decided to review a video of the Delhi High Court Bar Association meeting where a women’s quota proposal was rejected. The Court questioned the lack of constitutional discussions during the rejection process. The matter is adjourned until November 18, focusing on the decision-making process regarding women’s representation.
The Supreme Court issued a notice regarding a plea challenging the “one member, one post” rule for Delhi bar associations, which was upheld by the Delhi High Court. The rule mandates that all bar association elections in Delhi be conducted simultaneously and prohibits lawyers from contesting or holding multiple posts across different bar bodies. The next hearing is scheduled for September 9.
On Monday(12th August), the Delhi High Court concluded proceedings on a petition challenging the authenticity of AAP legal cell president Sanjeev Nasiar’s law degree, following a verification report from Devi Ahilya Vishwavidyalaya affirming its authenticity. The petition, filed by Naresh Chandra Gupta, also accused another advocate, Dilip Kumar Rana, of holding a fake law degree.
![[One Member, One Post Rule] "No Member Shall Hold or Contest Posts in Two Different Associations": SC Issues Notice on Delhi Bar Associations' Plea](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/image-71-3.png?resize=318%2C159&ssl=1)