WebinarsNew
Deep DiveNew
Explore Business Standard
Lawyers
The Bar Council of India (BCI) Thursday directed all state bar councils not to enrol any 2026 graduate of NALSAR University of Law as advocate until further orders but reversed this order within hours after an uproar on social media. In the first statement, BCI chairperson Manan Kumar Mishra said it was examining allegations regarding a campaign against Chief Justice of India Surya Kant's participation in the university's convocation and had sought a report identifying those responsible. The apex statutory body for lawyers said a final decision in the matter would be taken on August 19 after considering the material placed before it. The BCI then modified its decision after the uproar on social media and allowed state bar councils to enrol 2026 graduates of NALSAR University of Law as advocates. The new notification modified the earlier order, saying the "vast majority" of the students were innocent and should not be made to suffer for the alleged misconduct of a few. In the fresh
In a significant verdict, the Supreme Court on Tuesday held that banks and the Indian Banks' Association (IBA) cannot put the advocates in the "caution list" merely on allegations of professional negligence. Reinforcing the independence of the legal profession, a bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Alok Aradhe held that blacklisting lawyers amounted to an impermissible encroachment upon the statutory disciplinary jurisdiction of the Bar Councils. "We direct the Bar Council of India to constitute a team of senior and junior lawyers as well as experts in the field of establishing academic institutions for considering, discussing and evolving the idea of establishing National Legal Academy (for lawyers). "We hope and trust the BCI will rise to the occasion and reflect on all these issues and inform the court of its decision," Justice Narasimha, who authored a 41-page judgement, said. The verdict clarified the scope of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution and held that
The Supreme Court on Monday said it would not allow senior advocates to either mention matters for urgent listing or to argue in cases listed on partial court working days. The apex court said it was being done to encourage young lawyers to argue their cases during the partial court working days from today till July 12. The summer vacation in the top court has been rechristened as partial court working days. This year, three to four benches would be holding court each week during this period. "No senior advocates will be allowed in my court," Justice Vikram Nath, who was heading a bench which also comprised Justice P B Varale, said at the outset. When a senior advocate tried to mention a matter, Justice Nath said he would not allow senior lawyers to mention the matter or argue in cases listed before his bench during the partial court working days. Justice Nath said he would only permit young lawyers and advocates-on-record (AoRs) to argue before his bench during this period. Whe
The Union Law Ministry has increased the fees of advocate, who represent the central government in courts across the country, after a gap of nearly 11 years. In a notification issued on February 5, the department of legal affairs in the law ministry said that now group 'A' counsels appearing for regular appeals and defended petitions for final hearing will get Rs 21,600 per case per day, while group 'B' and 'C' counsels will be paid Rs 14,400. Earlier, the fee stood at Rs 13,500 for group A counsels and Rs 9,000 for group B and C counsels. The fee payable to government counsels was last revised in October 2015. Fees for other category of cases and setting up conferences with various central ministries has also been revised. Fee payable to counsels appearing in courts outside their headquarters -- which could be Delhi or state capitals -- has also been hiked. A top official said the hike was long overdue keeping in mind inflation and rising costs of hiring professionals. "The fe
The standards of ethical values are higher for lawyers, the Supreme Court on Friday said while refusing to allow a plea of a Telangana lawyer who has been barred from contesting the upcoming state bar council elections on account of pending criminal complaints. A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and justices Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul M Pancholi prima facie observed that the he is not the person who should be allowed to contest the (Telangana State Bar Council) elections. The top court was hearing a plea of Rapolu Bhaskar, a prominent Telangana High Court advocate, assailing provisions of disqualification of an advocate in state Bar Council. Referring to the provisions, a lawyer, representing Bhaskar, said he was neither convicted nor punished in any matter. The standard of ethical values are higher for lawyers, the CJI said, adding lawyers often approach courts when any tainted person is contesting general elections. Referring to the recent poor public perception about ba
The Delhi High Court on Monday ruled that no law student in the country should be detained from sitting in examinations due to lack of minimum attendance. The high court, which passed a slew of directions in relation to mandatory attendance requirement in law colleges, asked the Bar Council of India (BCI) to modify the mandatory attendance norms. Due to shortage of attendance, student's promotion to next semester class cannot be withheld, it said. A bench of Justices Prathiba M Singh and Sharma passed the order while disposing of a suo motu petition, initiated by the Supreme Court, in relation to the death of law student Sushant Rohilla by suicide in 2016 after allegedly being barred from sitting for the semester exams due to lack of requisite attendance. Having heard at length the submission of all stakeholders in this case over the course of hearing and having considered the stark realities that have come to the surface, this court is strongly of the view that norms education in
The Delhi High Court on Wednesday set aside a notification of the National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) making scores of CLAT-PG a basis for the recruitment of lawyers. A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela allowed a petition challenging the August 11 notification of the NHAI. "The writ petition is allowed. Resultantly, the recruitment criteria given in the notification is quashed," the bench said while pronouncing its judgment. The detailed judgment is awaited. The court's verdict came on a plea challenging a notification of the NHAI making scores of CLAT-PG a basis for the recruitment of lawyers. On September 18, the court stayed the notification, saying there seemed no rationale behind the process. According to the petition filed by Shannu Bahgel, a lawyer, any score of a candidate in the Common Law Admission Test 2022 (Post Graduate) (CLAT-PG) cannot be made the basis for public employment, as it is conducted only for assessing
Nepal's major political parties and apex lawyers' body have strongly criticised the president's decision to dissolve parliament, describing the move as "unconstitutional", "arbitrary" and a serious blow to democracy. The criticism followed Friday's recommendation by the first cabinet meeting chaired by interim Prime Minister Sushila Karki to dissolve the House of Representatives, a proposal that President Ram Chandra Paudel promptly approved. The house was dissolved with effect from 11 pm on September 12, 2025, according to a notice issued by the President's Office. The president also fixed March 21, 2026, as the date for holding fresh parliamentary elections, it said. Political parties across the spectrum slammed the dissolution move. Disapproving of the move, Nepali Congress (NC), the largest political party of the country, warned that any action violating the Constitution would be unacceptable. The Central Executive Committee meeting of the Nepali Congress held on Saturday ...
The Delhi High Court will hear on September 8 a petition challenging a National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) notification making scores of CLAT-PG a basis for the recruitment of lawyers. A bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, which recently heard the matter briefly, granted time to the NHAI's counsel to get instructions on the issue. The court has listed the petition for further hearing on Monday. According to the petition filed by Shannu Bahgel, a practising lawyer, any score of a candidate in the Common Law Admission Test 2022 (Post Graduate) (CLAT-PG) cannot be made the basis for public employment as it is conducted only for assessing the merit of the respective candidates holding an LL.B degree to pursue a master's degree in law. It was argued on behalf of the petitioner that the purpose of selection pursuant to the August 11 notification is not to pursue a master's degree in law but to provide services of a legal ...