Advocates’ Rights and Legal Insights

Advocates Rights

Supreme Court Dismisses Lawyer’s Plea Seeking ₹1 Crore Fee for ‘Saving’ Former CJI Dipak Misra

The Supreme Court dismissed a petition by Advocate Ashok Pandey seeking ₹1 crore from the Union Government as fees for litigation he claimed to have filed to "save" former CJI Dipak Misra from impeachment.

A Bench led by CJI Surya Kant termed the plea "misconceived," sarcastically noting that such "social service" to the institution is priceless and cannot be quantified monetarily.

The petitioner challenged an Allahabad High Court order rejecting his claim for expenses.

The Court observed that since the advocate appeared in person, no professional fees were applicable, upholding the High Court's refusal to grant a certificate of appeal.

[Ashok Pandey v. UOI]

Read Order / 3 hours ago

AnvishaaBookmark

Kerala Notifies Advocates’ Welfare Fund (Amendment) Act, 2026; Changes Trustee Committee Structure

The Government of Kerala notified the Kerala Advocates' Welfare Fund (Amendment) Act, 2026, which came into force on March 9, amending provisions of the Kerala Advocates' Welfare Fund Act, 1980.

The amendment changes the composition of the Welfare Fund Trustee Committee by increasing government-nominated members from one to two and providing that the Secretary of the Committee will be appointed by the government instead of the Bar Council.

It also expands the investment options for the Welfare Fund, allowing funds to be invested in government bonds, pension schemes, and insurance schemes for advocates, with prior government approval.

Read Details / 3 hours ago

S PavithraBookmark

Andhra Pradesh High Court: Client Shouldn’t Suffer for Lawyer’s Lapse, Restores Dismissed Appeal

The Andhra Pradesh High Court ruled that clients should not suffer due to mistakes or negligence by their lawyers. The case arose when a civil appeal was dismissed for non-prosecution because both the petitioner and counsel were absent.

The petitioner later sought restoration of the appeal and condonation of delay, but the lower court rejected the applications, stating that the lawyer could not file affidavits on behalf of the client.

The High Court held that an advocate holding a valid vakalatnama is authorised to file affidavits and applications for the client.

Emphasising substantive justice over procedural technicalities, the Court restored the appeal and directed the lower court to decide the case on merits.

[Rajana Anthonamma v. Gandreti Mariakumar]

Read Details / 4 days ago

S PavithraBookmark

Clean Court Washrooms are Integral to Constitutional Dignity: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court held that clean and accessible washrooms in court complexes are not merely facilities but integral to constitutional dignity.

The case arose from a petition by a woman advocate highlighting unhygienic conditions in the Saket District Court washrooms, including non-functional toilets and lack of water. The Court observed that court complexes are “constitutional spaces” where citizens seek justice, and inadequate sanitation undermines dignity, health, and equality.

It emphasised that rights under Articles 14, 15, and 21 require institutions to provide basic facilities accommodating biological realities.

Recording assurances from the Public Works Department that improvements would be maintained, the Court disposed of the petition while stressing continued compliance.

Read Details / 6 days ago

S PavithraBookmark

Supreme Court of India Adopts Policy for Early Transfer of Incoming High Court Chief Justices

The Supreme Court Collegium has introduced a new policy enabling judges who are in line to become Chief Justices of High Courts to be transferred approximately two months before the anticipated vacancy arises.

The objective is to allow the incoming Chief Justice to familiarise themselves with the court’s administrative structure and functioning, ensuring a smooth transition without disruption to judicial work.

As per the policy, the judge will initially serve as a puisne judge in the transferee High Court and assume charge as Chief Justice once the incumbent retires.

Pursuant to this approach, the Collegium has recommended the transfer of Justice Lisa Gill from the Punjab and Haryana High Court to the Andhra Pradesh High Court.

Read Details / 13 days ago

MananBookmark

Bar Council of Delhi Poll Panel Revokes Suspension of 63 Candidates; 16 Given Time to Respond

The election committee overseeing the Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) polls has revoked the suspension of 63 candidates who were earlier issued notices for allegedly violating the model code of conduct and election rules.

After receiving and examining explanations from 63 of them, the committee decided to withdraw the notices. The remaining 16 candidates have been granted an additional 12 hours to respond.

Earlier reports had indicated the suspension of 67 candidates, including designated Senior Advocates K.K. Manan and Ramesh Gupta. The figure later rose to 79 following further complaints and evidence.

Returning Officer Justice Talwant Singh stated that violations near polling booths disrupted voters and hindered smooth conduct of the election.

Read Details / 16 days ago

MananBookmark

Supreme Court Seeks Agreed Terms of Reference in Suo Motu Case on Strengthening Bar Associations

The Supreme Court directed stakeholders to submit agreed terms of reference in suo motu proceedings concerning the institutional strengthening of Bar Associations across the country.

The Court observed that despite multiple hearings since July 2024, the formal terms of reference are yet to be framed.

It asked counsel to place agreed suggestions within four weeks and directed the nodal counsel to circulate them to Registrars General of all High Courts for onward communication to District and Sub-Divisional Bar Associations.

The Court granted liberty to these associations to send their suggestions by email and listed the matter after eight weeks to decide the future course.

[Re: Strengthening & Enhancing The Institutional Strength Of Bar Associations v. The Registrar General & Ors.]

Read order / 20 days ago

MahiraBookmark

Supreme Court Flags Alarming Use of AI in Drafting Petitions with Fake Citations

The Supreme Court raised concerns over lawyers using artificial intelligence tools to draft petitions containing non-existent judgments and inaccurate citations.

The Court said it had noticed pleadings where cited precedents were fabricated or extracts did not match actual judgments. It referred to instances where fictitious cases were placed on record and noted similar issues had arisen earlier.

The Court stressed that while technology can assist legal research, advocates remain responsible for verifying every citation from authorised sources before filing.

It cautioned that unverified AI-generated content undermines the integrity of judicial proceedings.

Read Details / 23 days ago

MahiraBookmark

Bar Council of Kerala Elections on April 17, 23 Seats to be Filled With 30% Women Reservation

Elections to the Bar Council of Kerala will be held on April 17, 2026, from 10 AM to 5 PM across the State, as notified by a High-Powered Election Committee appointed by the SC.

The elections will fill 23 seats, with a mandatory 30% reservation for women in line with the SC’s interim directions. Of these, 12 seats are reserved for advocates with at least 10 years’ standing, 6 for other advocates, and 5 seats for women candidates.

The total Council strength remains 25, including two members to be co-opted by the BCI. The process begins with the provisional voters’ list on February 28.

A non-refundable nomination fee of ₹1.25 lakh has been fixed as per the Court’s directions.

Read Details / 24 days ago

MananBookmark

Allahabad High Court Orders Contempt Proceedings Against Advocate Over Remarks in Court

The Allahabad High Court has directed that contempt proceedings be initiated against Advocate Ashutosh Kumar Mishra for remarks made in a bail hearing.

Mishra allegedly told Justice Santosh Rai that the judge lacked the courage to act against the Investigating Officer and appeared to be working under government pressure.

The Court observed that his words, tone, and body language were objectionable, derogatory, and disrupted the proceedings for about ten minutes, amounting to prima facie criminal contempt under Section 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

The matter has been placed before the Chief Justice for appropriate action, and Justice Rai has recused from the bail case.

[Kunal v. State of UP]

Read Details / 24 days ago

VishwaBookmark

Supreme Court Permits Visually Impaired Candidates to Engage Scribes With More Than 10+2 Qualification

The Supreme Court has allowed visually impaired candidates appearing for AIBE and CLAT to use scribes who have qualifications higher than 10+2. The Court accepted the suggestion that there should be no bar on a scribe having more education, as long as the scribe is not a law graduate.

It directed the Bar Council of India and the Consortium of National Law Universities to implement and formally notify these changes before the next exam.

The Court also noted that the suggestion aligns with the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment guidelines.

The authorities must file a compliance affidavit within two weeks, and the matter is listed for March 20, 2026.

[Yash Dodani & Ors. v. UOI & Ors.]

Read Details / 27 days ago

VishwaBookmark

Delhi High Court Says Proxy Counsel Must be Prepared for Hearings

The Delhi High Court cautioned young lawyers appearing as proxy counsel to come prepared and be aware of the facts and stage of the case.

The Court observed that a counsel is expected to know at least the basic facts and procedural status before addressing the Bench. It pulled up an advocate who appeared without proper preparation and stressed that casual appearances affect the administration of justice.

The Court reminded members of the Bar that even when appearing as proxy, they carry full professional responsibility in assisting the Court.

[Priya Khurana v. Arpit Chadha]

Read order / 28 days ago

MahiraBookmark

Supreme Court Notifies New Guidelines for Designation of Senior Advocates

The Supreme Court has notified the Guidelines for Designation of Senior Advocates, 2026, replacing the earlier 100-point assessment system with a qualitative evaluation framework.

The Court said candidates will now be assessed based on ability, standing at the Bar, and special knowledge or experience in law. Eligibility requires at least 10 years of practice or a combined 10 years as an advocate and judicial officer.

A permanent secretariat will collect material on integrity and reputation before consideration by the Full Court.

Decisions will ordinarily be by consensus, with secret ballot in exceptional cases.

Read Details / 28 days ago

MahiraBookmark

Thanya Nathan Becomes First Visually Challenged Judge in Kerala

Thanya Nathan has created history by becoming the first visually challenged person to be appointed to Kerala’s judicial services.

She secured first rank among persons with disabilities in the Civil Judge (Junior Division) examination. A 100% visually challenged candidate, Nathan graduated with first rank in LLB from Kannur University and practised as an advocate in Taliparamba, Kannur district.

Her appointment follows the Supreme Court’s March 2025 ruling affirming that visually impaired candidates are eligible for judicial service appointments and must not face discrimination.

The Court emphasised the State’s duty to provide affirmative action and ensure inclusivity in judicial services.

Read Details / a month ago

MahiraBookmark

‘Gunda Raj’: Supreme Court Flags Attack on Lawyer Inside Tis Hazari Courtroom

The Supreme Court took serious note of an alleged attack on a lawyer inside a courtroom at Delhi’s Tis Hazari Courts, terming such incidents as “gunda raj” and a failure of the rule of law.

The incident was mentioned before a Bench led by the Chief Justice of India, which emphasised that violence within court premises cannot be tolerated.

The advocate alleged that he was assaulted by the complainant’s counsel and others while the judge was present in court.

The Supreme Court directed the lawyer to approach the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court for administrative action and seek appropriate redress.

Read Details / a month ago

MahiraBookmark