Post

@SudarshanNewsTV

@SureshChavhanke

More from @barandbench

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Jul 30

[Bombay High Court hearing constitutional validity of a provision in the Income Tax (IT) Act that grants tax exemption on gifts exchanged between “spouses"]

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta of a petition filed in Karnataka High Court praying for a similar relief.

SG: The plea is verbatim same. The lawyer for the petitioner here, is appearing there also. The learned ASG of Karnataka has started arguments and matter has remained part-heard. So, I have called for those papers so that our affidavits may not clash. Since that is part-heard and the counsel is common, I would request to have this on some other day.

#BombayHighCourt #IncomeTax #SameSex

Advocate Dhruv Janssen-Sanghavi for the petitioners: The issue over there is identical in many ways, but slightly different in the in terms of the facts. But I do not think that bars one high court from deciding the issue.

#BombayHighCourt #IncomeTax #SameSex

Division bench of Justices BP Colabawalla and FP Pooniwalla: You are talking about interpretation of a central act. What can happen is, we take a decision, Karnataka High Court takes a decision, and then there is complete chaos because at the end of the day, the implementation is of a central act. Let us say Bombay takes a decision in favor of the petitioner. The Income Tax authorities in Maharashtra will have to implement giving deductions as per the law laid down by us. Karnataka High Court, the Income Tax authorities will follow what the law is laid down by the Karnataka High Court. And then, Gujarat, where no such petition is filed, or Madras, where no such petition is filed, they will not know whether to follow Karnataka or whether to follow Bombay.

#BombayHighCourt #IncomeTax #SameSex

Read 8 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Jul 30

Supreme Court to shortly resume hearing petitions challenging the 2023 law that replaced the Chief Justice of India with a Cabinet Minister on the selection panel for appointing the Chief Election Commissioner and Election Commissioners.

Bench: Justices Dipankar Datta and SC Sharma

Hearing expected to commence at 2pm.

AG R Venkataramani appears for the Union of India.

Venkataramani reads from the top court’s Anoop Baranwal judgement - which said that CJI being part of the selection panel was only meant to fill a legislative vacuum, before the parliament passes a law (the parliament then passed the 2023 law and replaced the CJI with a cabinet minister in the selection panel).

Read 37 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Jul 30

Supreme Court hears plea against the use of Pellet guns on protesting students at Jantar Mantar and other areas

Adv Vrinda Grover: It has a kinetic metallic projectile

Justice Joymalya Bagchi: But police rules allows the use in exceptional circumstances unless you challenge the rules itself.. one of the steps of graded approach is use of pellet guns

Grover: Give me 2 minutes. there can be rubber, plastic and metallic pellets. These were metallic and recovered from the bodies. Nature of the crowd will determine use of this as well. Was it a violent mob? No. These metallic pellets were fired.

@CPDelhi @Cockroachisback #SupremeCourt

Justice Bagchi: We are not averse to examine use of pellets in an individual use. you have to show us if graded response use of pellets can be allowed when even bullets are used in some situations. If your convict uses a bullet...

CJI: in light of alleged excessive use.. your prayer should be that court lays down a protocol regarding the use

Grover: Yes only metallic pellets

Justice Bagchi: In Calcutta HC there was a rule that bullets should be fired at the chest to preserve amunition and not any other body area

SG: must be some colonial era..

Justice Bagchi: that rule was struck down. So you have to show us rules where use of pellets is arbitrary, etc.

Adv Grover: Even the DPRD document which I have was accessed by a RTI.

Justice Bagchi: must be there the archive. If not, then that is not done. It has to be there..

Read 6 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Jul 28

#SupremeCourt begins hearing the batch of petitions challenging the reinstatement of the three-year minimum practice requirement for recruitment to the post of Civil Judge (Junior Division)

Senior Advocate Pinky Anand: if this happens then good people will not enter the profession. Women will not come.

We have suggestions... Selected candidates undergoing training for the post of Civil Judge may be attached, for a specified period, to designated Senior Advocates, Government Pleaders, Advocates General, Standing Counsel, and Assistant Legal Aid Defence Counsel under the Legal Aid Defence Counsel (LADC) Scheme, 2022.

A similar system has been adopted in Germany, where a candidate aspiring to judicial office must complete a university law degree followed by preparatory training under Section 5b of the German Judiciary Act, 1932. The training lasts for two years and includes placements in civil courts, criminal courts, public prosecution offices and other legal institutions.

At present, State Judicial Academies follow different induction and training systems. There is a need for a uniform national training framework, either through the National Judicial Academy or a permanent committee headed by the Chief Justice of India as ex officio Chairperson, to continuously develop and standardise training modalities for the subordinate judiciary.

We have also suggested reforms in legal education, including:

Optional, structured six-month practice modules during the three-year and five-year law degree programmes;

Specialised degree courses for judicial aspirants to identify, train and expose them to high-quality judicial education from the university stage itself. One such example is the BA LL.B. (Adjudication and Justicing) programme offered by an MNLU.

It is imperative that this issue is flagged. Ultimately, the merit, competence and ability of a Civil Judge are of concern to both the Bar and the Bench.

Accordingly, it is suggested that Civil Judges (Junior Division) be provided scholarships, administrative leave for higher legal education and specialisation, both in India and abroad, as well as opportunities for exchange programmes, placements and deputation.

Sr Adv Anand: We have to bring the judges at the correct age.

Sr Adv Colin Gonsalves: Our compilation demonstrates that the three-year practice requirement is not necessary. I also deal with the expansion of judicial academies. By 2026, almost every State, barring a few smaller ones, has a full-fledged State Judicial Academy. The time is therefore ripe to train judges after they graduate from law schools. Instead, we are sending fresh graduates back into litigation for three years.
Then there is an an article by a former Director of the National Judicial Academy. In paragraph 13, he recommends replacing the three-year practice requirement with a mandatory, intensive induction training programme.
The compilation also addresses judicial education in collaboration with universities. It refers to the University of Virginia model and, subsequently, the French model, both of which emphasise collaboration between judicial academies and universities.
Another suggestion is to adopt experiential learning from the very beginning through legal aid work, clerkships and internships, coupled with continuous evaluation, accountability mechanisms and holistic judicial training.
The compilation also sets out the views of the National Law Universities. I believe the learned Amicus' presentation may not have fully reflected them. ...National Law Universities and leading law schools across the country consistently recommend against retaining the three-year practice rule.
Now on deal with judicial vacancies. Higher Judicial Service examinations continue to witness a significant number of vacancies across the country. The data also shows that only around 20% of graduates from National Law Universities enter litigation. The experience of the NLUs is that retaining the three-year practice requirement discourages graduates from leading law schools from opting for judicial service.
The compilation also refers to a speech by former Chief Justice N.V. Ramana, where he observed that very few graduates from National Law Schools are interested in joining litigation.

Read 7 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Jul 28

Delhi High Court refuses to entertain a petition seeking withdrawal of a pending enquiry from the administrative control and supervision of police officer Sandeep Lamba, who was seen slapping a woman during the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) protest.

The matter was listed before Justice Girish Kathpalia

The petition was filed by a 68 year old woman in a 2025 incident, where she complained of enquiry into illegally detention by police the entire night without any formal warrant or notice.

The petitioner is seeking to withdraw the pending enquiry from Additional DCP Sandeep Lamba.
The Counsel submitted: He was violating a woman, which has been widely reported in the media wherein he is seen slapping a woman in broad daylight while in uniform, and subsequently administrative action has been taken.

Read 8 tweets

Bar and Bench

@barandbench

Jul 25

Supreme Court judge Justice Ujjal Bhuyan in his key note address at the Justice G.P. Singh 4th Memorial Lecture at the National Law University at Bhopal said:

Though I am a part of the Supreme Court, I am an insider. I am critical of the functioning of the Supreme Court to a great extent, and I don't mince my words. Perhaps for this reason, some are not happy, but leave it at that.

#JusticeUjjalBhuyan #SupremeCourt

Justice Bhuyan: In a span of over 25 years, this university has established itself as a center of learning and excellence. It has done commendably well, for which the faculty and the students deserve all the praise. But one word I would like to put in: This university has done exceptionally well, there are many universities which are doing well. The question is, where do Indian universities stand today on a global comparison? Why is it that people with means, the first thing they do is to send their students, to send their children abroad? Why? We need to ask this.

#JusticeUjjalBhuyan #SupremeCourt

Justice Bhuyan: The other day I was invited by another National Law University for the induction program of the new batch of students. I requested the university that "Allow the students to be themselves, encourage their inquisitiveness."
Students should be encouraged to question. Unless we question, unless students question, they will only be parroting the texts, and they will become like a captive audience.
Captive audience, I say, when a high court judge speaks, the district judges are there, the district judiciary, the judges of the tribal judiciary are there and they are not questioned. Everything is being asked or everything being said is being lapped up. So our students need to be critical, need to question, including the judiciary.

#JusticeUjjalBhuyan #SupremeCourt

Read 31 tweets

Share this page!

Enter URL or ID to Unroll

Bar and Bench

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

More from @barandbench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Bar and Bench

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Send Email!