From ensuring police protection to compensation: how the Advocates Protection Bill aims to safeguard Delhi lawyers
The draft of the Delhi Advocates (Protection) Bill underlines that lawyers in Delhi who are at risk of facing violence are entitled to police protection.
Following the Delhi High Court's directions last month, the government recently shared the draft with lawyers who had approached the court regarding the safety of legal professionals.
'Any advocate who is under the threat of being a victim of an act of violence shall be entitled to police protection. The decision in this regard shall be taken by the deputy commissioner of police concerned in accordance with the rules, which the government may frame in this regard,' reads the draft shared on May 22.
The draft also states that those who commit or abet 'acts of violence' against advocates 'shall be punished with imprisonment…for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine or with both'. Repeat offenders will be punished with an imprisonment of up to five years and a fine.
These 'acts of violence' include harassment, coercion, assault, criminal force or criminal intimidation with an intent to prevent the lawyer from discharging duties, coercion to withdraw vakalatnama (legal document that authorises an advocate to represent a party) and loss or damage to any property or documents belonging to the advocate.
'Whoever stops, restrains, or attempts to stop or restrain any advocate from appearing before any court, tribunal, or judicial authority or from discharging his professional duties in any manner before the aforesaid forums shall be deemed to have committed an offence under this Act. Provided that the fact that advocates are on strike or any other similar reason, shall not constitute a defence to any offence committed under this section,' reads the draft.
Along with fines and punishments, the draft also has a provision for compensation of 'such amount as may be determined by the Court for causing any act of violence against any advocate'.
There is, however, a caveat. The draft Bill prevents cognisance of the offences without the recommendation of the Bar Council of Delhi. 'Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act or any other law for the time being in force, no court shall take cognisance of any offence punishable under this Act unless there is a recommendation in writing by the Bar Council of Delhi,' it says.
Before making a recommendation, the Bar Council of Delhi will conduct a preliminary enquiry to 'satisfy itself'. This enquiry shall be completed 'preferably' within 90 days of receiving a written complaint from the aggrieved advocate or any authorised representative.
The draft Bill acknowledges a spike in the incidents of assault and intimidation against lawyers in Delhi. 'Recently, such incidents have reached alarming heights. This has also resulted in law-and-order situations and deficiencies in rendering professional services by advocates to their clients, apart from causing a deep sense of fear in the minds of advocates,' it reads.
On April 21, the high court had told the Delhi government to take 'expeditious steps' for enacting the Advocates Protection Bill.
Justice Sachin Datta gave these directions while hearing a petition filed by advocates Deepa Joseph and Alpha Phiris Dayal seeking instructions to the Centre and the Delhi government to consider enacting the Advocates Protection Bill in the Capital.
The high court had then also directed that a copy of the draft be provided to the applicants. This was finally done on May 22.
As per the Delhi government, the Bill will require approval from the Council of Ministers, after which it will be referred to the Lieutenant Governor for approval.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
India Gazette
29 minutes ago
- India Gazette
Delhi High Court affirms Military Code over religious exemptions
New Delhi [India], May 31 (ANI): Reaffirming the unity and discipline of the armed forces, the Delhi High Court has upheld the termination of a Commanding Officer who refused to participate in regimental weekly religious parades, citing his Christian faith. The court stated that the Indian Armed Forces are composed of personnel from diverse religious backgrounds, but their primary duty is to safeguard the nation. It asserted that military unity is forged through service and uniform rather than religious, caste, or regional distinctions. Additionally, the court underscored the heightened responsibility of Commanding Officers to ensure that troops under their command have appropriate facilities to observe their respective religious practices while maintaining military cohesion and discipline. In its ruling, the Delhi High Court reinforced the secular foundation of the Indian Armed Forces, emphasising that while certain regiments may carry names linked to religion or region, this does not compromise the institution's neutrality. The court noted that war cries--often perceived as religious--are purely motivational, designed to foster unity and solidarity among troops. The bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur also highlighted that the armed forces respect the religious beliefs of their personnel, as outlined in paragraph 332 of military regulations, which mandates that religious customs and prejudices be honoured. Further, the court underscored the pivotal role of Commanding Officers in ensuring their troops have access to religious observance facilities while maintaining unit cohesion. It ruled that commanding officers must lead by example, prioritising collective unity over individual religious preferences, especially in combat and warfare scenarios. The Court has upheld the termination of an Indian Army officer who refused to participate in regimental religious parades, citing personal faith. The officer, dismissed without pension or gratuity, had sought reinstatement but was denied. Commissioned in 2017, the officer was assigned to a regiment comprising personnel from different religious backgrounds. He argued that the unit lacked a 'Sarv Dharm Sthal' for all faiths and requested exemption from entering temples during religious rituals. The Army maintained that despite multiple counselling sessions, the officer persistently refused to attend mandatory regimental parades, undermining unit cohesion. After exhausting all options, the Chief of Army Staff deemed his retention undesirable due to misconduct. The court noted that while some regiments bear religious names and use war cries with religious connotations, these elements serve purely motivational purposes and do not compromise the secular ethos of the Armed Forces. It stressed that Commanding Officers must prioritise discipline and unity over personal religious beliefs. Recognising the heightened discipline required in the military, the bench ruled that courts cannot interfere with decisions necessary for maintaining morale and operational effectiveness. It concluded that the officer's refusal to comply had disrupted traditional camaraderie, making his dismissal justified. (ANI)
India Gazette
29 minutes ago
- India Gazette
Delhi HC rejects plea to halt demolition of Pakistani-Hindu refugee camp
New Delhi [India], May 31 (ANI): The Delhi High Court has rejected a petition seeking to restrain the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) from demolishing the Pakistani-Hindu refugee camp at Majnu Ka Tila until alternative land is allocated to its residents. The court acknowledged its sincere attempts to engage with relevant authorities to facilitate the rehabilitation and relocation of the refugees. However, these efforts remained unproductive, largely due to bureaucratic delays, particularly on the part of the Union of India. Despite the humanitarian concerns, the court clarified that framing policy for refugee relief is beyond its jurisdiction. In a judgment delivered on Friday, Justice Dharmesh Sharma ruled that the interim order issued on March 12, 2024, stands vacated. The court further stated that the petitioner, Ravi Ranjan Singh, along with other similarly placed refugees, 'have no right to continue to occupy the area in question,' thereby dismissing their plea to halt the eviction. The bench emphasised the necessity of safeguarding the ecologically sensitive Yamuna floodplains. It noted that environmental protection measures align with directives from the Supreme Court, the National Green Tribunal (NGT), and the Delhi High Court itself. These actions aim to preserve ecological integrity and uphold the fundamental right to a clean and healthy environment for both current and future generations. Given the fragile state of the Yamuna River, the court asserted that any interference with its restoration efforts cannot be justified. It ruled that humanitarian considerations cannot override environmental imperatives, as such exemptions would delay critical public projects. The petition, filed by Singh, highlighted the plight of nearly 800 Hindu refugees from Pakistan. It urged the court to direct the DDA to refrain from demolition until alternative land was allocated in accordance with the government's policy under the Citizenship Amendment Act, 2019. The plea also called for embankments along the Yamuna to protect such settlements and religious structures, citing precedents like the Akshardham Temple and the Commonwealth Games Village. (ANI)
Hans India
an hour ago
- Hans India
Two Maoists charge sheeted by NIA in 2022 Jharkhand arms recovery case
New Delhi: In a fresh set of chargesheet, two more accused have been named by the National Investigation Agency (NIA) in a 2022 case relating to seizure of arms and ammunition as part of a conspiracy by the banned CPI (Maoist) terror conspiracy to attack security forces in Jharkhand. The charges were filed by the agency against Ranthu Oraon and Niraj Singh Kherwar, both hailing from Jharkhand, taking the number of accused in the case RC-02/2022/NIA/RNC to 25. The NIA has chargesheeted the two under the Arms Act, Explosive Substance Act and Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. Acting on a tip-off, the local police and CRPF personnel had, in February 2022, launched a joint search operation in the forest area of Bulbul, Lohardaga, Jharkhand, where CPI (Maoist) cadres had gathered to plan an attack on security forces in the Bauxite Mines Area to take revenge against the arrest of their top commander, Prashant Bose. The gathering was led by the terror organisation's Regional Commander Ravindra Ganjhu, along with active cadres Balram Oraon, Muneshwar Ganjhu and 45-60 other cadres. On their way to Bahabar Jungle, the security forces had come under indiscriminate firing by the CPI (Maoist) cadres at Harkatta Toli and Bangla Pat. An encounter followed, after which the security forces extensively searched the area and seized a large quantity of arms and ammunition. Jharkhand Police had initially charge sheeted nine persons in the case. Subsequently, between August 2023 and May 2025, NIA filed five supplementary chargesheets against 23 persons. This included nine accused already chargesheeted by Jharkhand police and further charged under new sections by NIA. NIA, during the course of investigation, found that the conspiracy was aimed at carrying out terrorist and violent acts and armed rebellion with the objective of threatening the integrity, security, and sovereignty of the nation, and destabilising the government. Credible evidence collected by NIA against the arrested accused, including Zonal Commander, Sub-Zonal Commander, Area Commander and armed cadres, had also revealed complicity of other CPI (Maoist) cadres and overground supporters. NIA is hunting out the other co-conspirators as part of its efforts to dismantle the CPI (Maoist) network in the country.
