Today, On 13th March, The Supreme Court of India reaffirmed the mandatory three-year practice rule, with the CJI stressing that the condition must remain while its implementation needs refinement. He also questioned passive practice and suggested free legal aid work as experience.
Today, On 26th February, The Supreme Court raised concerns over the three-year practice requirement for entry-level judicial service, especially its impact on women aspirants. The Chief Justice said, “No doubt practice is important, but we also have to see the impact on young talent.”
Justice Pankaj Bhatia of the Allahabad High Court recused himself from a bail plea, citing discouraging remarks by the Supreme Court of India and seeking reassignment. He asked Chief Justice to transfer roster, stating fairness, transparency, and trust processes.
The Supreme Court has warned warring couples against using courts to settle personal scores, saying such litigation chokes the justice system. Emphasising mediation, the Court urged early reconciliation in matrimonial disputes instead of prolonged civil and criminal battles.
The Supreme Court of India questioned the Delhi government’s move to implement the private school fee regulation law after the academic year had already begun. The Court warned that hurried enforcement could have retrospective effects and disrupt schools, asking the government to reconsider limiting the exercise to 2025–26 only.
Today, On 18th December, Supreme Court urged continued cooperation between the Kerala Governor and the State Government while concluding the Vice-Chancellor appointment row, as Justice JB Pardiwala expressed hope that dialogue would prevail, perhaps over a cup of coffee, in public interest.
The Supreme Court Bench led by CJI Gavai highlighted the need for discipline in arguments, cautioning against rushed submissions. Justice Narasimha advised younger lawyers to return to the “old-school” habit of reading judgments completely.
The Supreme Court of India expressed strong dissatisfaction with ASG Archana Pathak Dave for raising a technical objection during a hearing on a convict’s remission, after significant hearing time had elapsed. Justice Oka criticized the delay’s impact on other litigants and emphasized efficient use of court time. The case was adjourned until May 7.
