Balance Ethical Standards of Legal Profession: SC Examines Disqualifying Advocates Under Telangana Bar Council Election Rules

The Supreme Court examined Telangana Bar Council election rules disqualifying advocates, stressing the need to balance high ethical standards of the legal profession with fairness and the presumption of innocence where criminal or disciplinary proceedings are merely pending.

No Extra or ‘Optional’ Fees for Enrolling Lawyers: Supreme Court Warns State Bar Councils & BCI

The Supreme Court has barred State Bar Councils and the BCI from collecting any “optional” charges beyond legal enrolment fees. The Karnataka State Bar Council has been told to halt such collections at once.

Supreme Court: “Muslim Member of State Bar Council No Longer Eligible for Waqf Board After Losing Position”

Today, On 22nd April, The Supreme Court stated that a Muslim member of a state Bar Council is not eligible to serve on the Waqf Board if they lose their Bar Council position. The Court highlighted that membership in the Bar Council is a key requirement for Waqf Board eligibility.

Fake Law Degrees | “Initiate Nationwide Verification Of Advocates”: BCI Orders

The Bar Council of India (BCI) initiated a nationwide verification process for advocates in response to increasing cases of fake law degrees. This step aims to uphold the integrity of the legal profession by identifying and eliminating fraudulent practitioners. The BCI emphasized the importance of ensuring that only qualified and genuine advocates practice law in India.

Kerala High Court: “State Bar Council Can’t Impose a Fee on Applicants For Verifying Their Educational Certificates During The Enrollment Process”

The Kerala High Court ruled that the State Bar Council of India (BCI) cannot charge Rs.2,500 as certificate verification fees for enrollment. The court said that the rule directing State Bar Councils to collect this fee cannot be enforced.

[AIBE 2024] ‘Unjust’ Merely Because Students Had Not Filed Petitions: HC Directs BCI to Grant 29 Law Grads Provisional Certificates to Sit For Exam

The Gujarat High Court extended interim relief to all law graduates from unapproved institutions, allowing them to obtain provisional certificates for the AIBE 2024. The court ruled it unjust to deny these graduates the chance to participate solely for not filing petitions, instructing the Bar Council of Gujarat to process their enrollment forms.

“Culture of Frequent Strikes Gives Bad Name to Legal Profession”: Allahabad HC Criticizes Bar Associations

The Allahabad High Court condemned the frequent strikes by lawyers, emphasizing their detrimental effects on the legal profession’s reputation and justice delivery. It instructed district judges in Uttar Pradesh to stop circulating strike resolutions from Bar Associations, highlighting that such actions hinder court operations and public trust. The court urged lawyers to fulfill their duties responsibly.

“Court Can’t Legislate; It Can Only Interpret The Law”: HC Rejects PIL, Leaves Advocate Protection Law to State Of West Bengal

The Calcutta High Court dismissed a PIL seeking lawyer protection law enforcement, stating its role is to interpret the law, not create it. It directed petitioners to approach the State and urged the State Bar Council to present views to the government for appropriate legislation. CCTV installation and complaint registration were also discussed.

Chief Justice Chandrachud Visits SC Advocate-On-Record Examination Hall

Today, On 11th June, The Chief Justice of India, D.Y. Chandrachud, recently visited the Advocate-on-Record examination hall at the Supreme Court, showing his keen interest in the examination process. Advocate-on-Record (AOR) is crucial for lawyers aiming to file cases directly in the Supreme Court. AORs have the authority to file cases and represent clients in the court, with certain privileges.

Allahabad High Court: ‘Neither State Bar Council Nor A Bar Association Can Be Treated Alike A Trade Union’

The Allahabad High Court has made a profound statement on the nature of lawyers’ strikes, asserting that they bring the wheels of justice to a standstill and are detrimental to the pursuit of justice. The court, in its January 24 order, expressed this concern in strong terms: