Judicial Review Not Negated In Election Matters Where Level Playing Field Is Impaired By Violence: Supreme Court FIR Registration | Prospective Accused Has Locus Standi To Appeal Against Single Judge's Direction: Supreme Court Executing Deed Claiming Disputed Property Not 'False Document' Without Impersonation; Civil Disputes Can't Be Criminalised: Allahabad High Court Section 24 CPC | Partition Suit Can Be Transferred To High Court To Avoid Inconsistent Findings With Pending Testamentary Proceedings: Bombay High Court Upgraded Junior High Schools Lose Separate Legal Identity; Recruitment Under 1978 Rules Not Maintainable For Resulting Vacancies: Allahabad High Court Section 370 IPC | Consent Of Victim Is Irrelevant For Proving Trafficking; High Court Sustains Conviction Despite Acquittal Under Section 370A(2) Section 307 IPC | Absence Of Bodily Injury Does Not Exclude Offence If Intention Or Knowledge Is Established From Surrounding Circumstances: Delhi High Court Income Tax Reopening | Assessing Officer Cannot Initiate Reassessment Based On Third-Party Allegations Without Establishing Direct Nexus With Assessee: Gujarat High Court Section 294 CrPC | Non-Examination Of Autopsy Doctor Not Fatal To Prosecution When Post-Mortem Report's Genuineness Is Undisputed: Karnataka High Court Section 25 Arms Act | Mere Custody Without Awareness Not An Offence, 'Conscious Possession' Essential: Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Over Single Live Cartridge Section 20 Prevention Of Corruption Act | Statutory Presumption Cannot Be Triggered Without Proof Of Demand; Mere Recovery Insufficient: Himachal Pradesh High Court Article 227 Constitution of India | High Court Cannot Sit In Appeal Over Findings Of Tribunal Under Supervisory Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Mere Registration Of Will Does Not Dispense With Requirement To Prove Execution Under Section 68 Evidence Act: Madras High Court Insurance Policy Exclusion | Onus To Prove Suicide Can Be Discharged By Circumstantial Evidence And Unexplained Discrepancies In Medical Records: NCDRC Registration Act | Contested Decree Declaring Pre-Existing Rights By Adverse Possession Does Not Require Compulsory Registration Or Stamp Duty: Madhya Pradesh High Court Section 100 Patents Act | Government Empowered To Authorise Manufacture Of Patented Life-Saving Drugs For Non-Commercial Distribution To Patients: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Slaps ₹1 Lakh Cost On Centre Over Botched Prisoner Repatriation Contempt Of Court | Bona Fide Efforts To Verify Credentials Preclude Finding Of 'Wilful Disobedience': Telangana High Court Financial Commissioner Cannot Remand Appointment Of Lambardar Without Finding Perversity In Collector’s Order: Punjab & Haryana High Court Article 226 | High Court Cannot Act As Second Appellate Authority Over Transfer Orders; Judicial Review Permissible Only On Four Limited Grounds: Rajasthan High Court Drugs and Cosmetics Act | Prosecution Must Prove Possession And Lack Of Licence Through Independent Evidence; Failure Of Panch Witnesses Is Fatal: Telangana High Court Section 392 IPC | Appellate Courts Can Reduce Sentence To Period Already Undergone Considering Protracted Litigation And Lack Of Criminal Antecedents: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Supreme Court Disposes of Contempt Petition : Warned Bar Association no impediment in the work of legal defence counsel

07 May 2024 2:49 AM

By: Admin


In a significant development, the Supreme Court of India delivered its verdict in Contempt Petition (Civil) No 726 of 2023 and Writ Petition (Civil) No 420 of 2023, reinstating the petitioners and similarly situated members of the Bharatpur Bar Association. The court's decision came on July 10, 2023, with Chief Justice Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha presiding over the case.

The order, which was disposed of by the court, emphasized the importance of ensuring no obstruction for the petitioners or other members of the Bar in performing their duties as legal defense counsel. In the order, the court highlighted that "there shall be no impediment in the work of legal defense counsel" and warned that coercive action would be taken if any incidents occur in the future.

"The concerned members of the Bar are placed on notice that this Court will be constrained to take recourse to the coercive arm of law, should any incident occur in the future," the court stated in its judgment.

The court acknowledged the statements made by the counsel representing the newly elected body of the Bharatpur Bar Association and the erstwhile Association. It was confirmed that no strike was declared, and steps were not taken to prevent the petitioners or similarly situated members of the Bar from pursuing their avocation or profession.

"The statements made on behalf of the respondents-contemnors, it is not expedient in the interest of justice to pursue the exercise of the contempt jurisdiction any further," the court remarked.

The judgment, which ensures the reinstatement of the petitioners and their colleagues, brings relief to the affected members of the Bar Association. It also serves as a reminder of the court's commitment to upholding the rights of legal defense counsel and maintaining an unhindered legal system.

The Supreme Court's decision in this case holds significance for the legal fraternity and sets a precedent for the protection of the professional rights of lawyers across the country.

Date of Decision: July 10, 2023

Purnaprakash Sharma & Ors   vs Yashwant Singh Faujdar & Ors

Latest Legal News