The Supreme Court annulled a Rs.1 lakh fine imposed on advocate Mehmood Pracha by the Allahabad High Court, which criticized him for “forum shopping” and attire while representing himself. Pracha’s plea was dismissed by the High Court, deemed to waste the court’s time. The Supreme Court found no basis for the fine.
The Supreme Court upheld the premature retirement of Uttar Pradesh judge Shobh Nath Singh due to a poor service record, emphasizing the high ethical standards required for judicial officers. The Court dismissed Singh’s appeal, reinforcing that judges must demonstrate integrity and accountability, reflecting the judiciary’s commitment to maintaining rigorous conduct.
The Supreme Court of India dismissed criminal proceedings against HDFC Bank, ruling that a corporation cannot possess mens rea, or criminal intent, needed for liability under the IPC. The court emphasized that the bank officials acted inadvertently in misinterpreting orders, lacking evidence of malicious intent or misappropriation, thus quashing the FIR.
Today, On 13th July, The Supreme Court questioned the retroactive application of Section 479 of the BNSS, allowing bail for first-time undertrials. This provision, addressing prison overcrowding, provides a more lenient option for release after serving one-third of the maximum sentence. The Court instructed the Central government to clarify this and emphasized the urgency of addressing prison conditions nationwide.
The Calcutta High Court granted temporary bail to an undertrial accused of rape for four weeks, citing the right of undertrials to interim bail, similar to parole for convicts. The decision was based on the accused’s prolonged custody and the psychological impact, questioning why undertrials can’t be given similar leniency as convicts.
The Calcutta High Court allowed a government doctor to resign and contest the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, emphasizing the public interest served by individuals aspiring to be public representatives. Dr. Pranat Tudu’s case from Jhargram Government Medical College sparked discussions on individual rights and public interest, referencing Clause 14 of the West Bengal Service Rules. The court’s decision sets a precedent for political participation in public service roles.
![[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)
