The Bar Council of Kerala has issued a show cause notice to lawyer Mohammed Fayiz for including a High Court judge’s official vehicle in his enrollment video, labeling it as misconduct under the Advocates Act, 1961. Fayiz has 15 days to respond to avoid disciplinary action, facing potential legal consequences.
Jharkhand: The Jharkhand High Court Advocates Association is protesting against the appointment of lawyers from outside the state as judges of the Jharkhand High Court.Since March 6, the lawyers have been boycotting the courts of Chief Justice MS Ramachandra Rao, Justice Sujit Narayan Prasad, and Justice Rongon Mukhopadhyay. These three judges are part of the High Court Collegium responsible for recommending names for the appointment of judges.
In August last year, the shocking rape and murder of a junior doctor at RG Kar Medical College and Hospital in Kolkata drew statewide attention. However, months before this tragic incident, the hospital’s former principal, Dr. Sandip Ghosh, was already under investigation by the West Bengal Human Rights Commission (WBHRC).
Madras: The Madras High Court ruled that legal restrictions on arresting women during the night are not absolute. A division bench comprising Justice G R Swaminathan and Justice M Jothiraman stated that these restrictions are advisory and not mandatory. This means that if the police fail to follow the rule, the arrest is not automatically illegal. However, the officer involved must provide a valid reason for not following the prescribed procedure.
Today, On 17th December, The Supreme Court deliberating on the case of two female judicial officers dismissed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, who argue their terminations were punitive and lacked fairness. Both were on probation, with claims of unfair disciplinary processes. The court has reserved judgment, considering issues of justice and procedural rights.
![[Lawyers Ads Controversy] Sulekha Moves Supreme Court Against Madras High Court Order](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/Image-1-2.png?resize=447%2C367&ssl=1)
The Madras High Court mandated the Bar Council of India (BCI) to establish guidelines against lawyer advertising. In response, Sulekha challenged the directive in the Supreme Court, which has combined it with JustDial’s similar plea. The Court is evaluating compliance with the Advocates Act and BCI regulations amid concerns about online lawyer services.
The Madras High Court ruled that prisoners should not be treated as slaves or subjected to inhumane treatment, responding to allegations of mistreatment by prison officials. The court emphasized that any exploitation of inmates must face strict action, underscoring the importance of lawful punishment and the responsibility of jail authorities to protect human dignity.
The Calcutta High Court directed disciplinary action against six police officers for mishandling a sexual assault complaint by an IAS officer’s wife, citing procedural lapses and tampering with the complaint. The case has been transferred to the Deputy Commissioner of Women Police for further investigation.
On Thursday(12th Sept), the Punjab and Haryana High Court stated that disciplinary action for facilitating gangster Lawrence Bishnoi’s interview in custody should include higher-ranking officers, not just lower-ranking ones. This followed the Punjab government’s commitment to initiate proceedings against the involved officers.