With due deference to the authority of the Apex Court, the majority and the dissent in Bhumika Trust (3-year practice rule judgment) has completely missed the point.
Making the regularisation of selected Magistrate dependent on the satisfaction of the High Court judge with whom they are attached is going to create far greater issues on the administrative side - those who have observed the system up close would understand what I am referring to.
But the argument that if senior lawyers do not entrust matters to juniors, then how can they be entrusted with deciding such matters - is nothing but an insult to hardships faced by the younger members of the Bar.
Everybody who has undergone the drill at the Bar would know how the young lawyers with up to are treated generally - intellectually starved, professionally abused.
An Assistant Public Prosecutor would have a quicker learning curve than a young member at the Bar, simply because of the number of matters that the APP would handle on a daily basis. Sadly, private chambers do not delegate that much to our young lawyers and so even after 1 year of practice they’re stuck in just drafting, complying with defects, applying for certified copies, taking adjournments and passovers.
Order withdrawn last night, no cause of action remaining, but the show must go on and the headlines must be tweeted.
A 10/10 performance by K. Parameshwar here, Oscar-worthy stuff.
BREAKING | Plea against BCI’s letters to NALSAR mentioned before Supreme Court
Sr. Adv. K Parameshwar: BCI has no business of what’s going on in a university.
CJI Kant: naturally this is absolutely uncalled for. It’s a dialogue between students and me. Who are they to raise an issue? This is totally uncalled for. In my student days I have been actively involved in student activities. Assuming even if they are wrong they have a right to protest. BCI doesn’t have any business.
Order: issue notice. Meanwhile no action shall be taken punitive action to be taken against student or faculty of any national law university/law university.
CJI: We don't think elaborate arguments are required...It was completely a peaceful protest by students raising some demand. It was within constitutional framework. By their version, they want to say that in such type of peaceful protest, there are awlays uninvited guests. They will enter with agenda...very soon they become co-host...on behalf of students, it is said despite constitutional right, we were treated like this.
Gopal S; no order was there for Jantar Mantar...protocols are there for police to announce on loudspeakers that this is what we are going to do...water cannons...lathis below legs...tear gas is a later step...
CJI: Every stakeholder should come out with constructive suggestion. Earlier protocol suggested by this court, with passage of time...lot of things happening in non-conventional manner. We need to address what kind of tear gas etc. used, whether to be allowed...in a democracy, agitations are bound to be there
Gopal S - An ASI broke windows of car himself. There is a video. These people behaved with a license. We want responsibility to be placed up the ladder. Unless this court does that, police think they can get away.
#SupremeCourt
🚨SHOCKING | Banner installed on a foot over bridge in Thane collapsed onto a passing motorcyclist, narrowly missing several vehicles. No major injuries reported
Funny how the very people trolling the Supreme Court & cheering the ruckus today will be the first to rush to the same institution when they’re in trouble.
As former CJI DYC rightly said: “The Constitution also works for those who don’t believe in it.”