Supreme Court’s order de-rostering an Allahabad HC judge sparks outrage among top judges. CJI Gavai seeks to resolve breach of judicial norms and natural justice.
The Supreme Court of India expressed concern over the professionalism of young lawyers after an incident where one walked away during an order’s dictation. Emphasizing that effective legal practice involves understanding courtroom etiquette, the court highlighted that academic knowledge is only part of being a good lawyer, with “court craft” accounting for the majority of skills needed.
The Allahabad High Court has referred a significant legal question regarding its power to quash FIRs to a nine-judge bench. Justice Deshwal disagreed with a previous seven-judge ruling from 1989, citing recent Supreme Court decisions that broadened the interpretation of High Courts’ inherent powers, arguing the old precedent is now “obsolete.”
The Madras High Court upheld its interim stay on Tamil Nadu legislation altering the Governor’s authority to appoint Vice-Chancellors, asserting potential unconstitutionality. It refuted claims of interfering with a Supreme Court decision, emphasizing judicial duty and the necessity of addressing unconstitutional laws without delay, reinforcing commitments to justice and constitutional integrity.
The Supreme Court, while reviewing the dismissals of judicial officers Aditi Kumar Sharma and Sarita Chaudhary, stressed the need for judges to avoid social media to maintain judicial discipline and impartiality. The court acknowledged various factors affecting performance and is deliberating on the reinstatement of the dismissed officers.
When conflicting judgments of equal benches arise and a larger bench reference is pending, the judgment delivered earlier will prevail, as per a recent Allahabad High Court ruling. Upholding judicial discipline, the court emphasized the doctrine of stare decisis, ensuring consistency and predictability in legal decisions. The case was referred to a larger bench for decision.