Delhi High Court directs govt to enact Advocates Protection Bill
According to a status report filed by the Delhi government's law department in September 2024, the final draft of the Bill is currently pending consideration before the Council of Ministers, awaiting a policy decision on its enactment and implementation.
However, a copy of the draft is yet to be shared with the Coordination Committee of All District Courts Bar Associations of Delhi. The Committee consequently moved an application seeking a direction from the high court to compel the Delhi government to share the draft with them.
On April 21, Justice Sachin Datta ordered the Delhi government to provide the Committee with a copy of the draft Bill. 'The limited request of the applicant is that the final draft of Advocate Protection Bill, 2024 be provided to them... to give any representation that they seek to with regard to the provisions. The GNCTD is directed to provide a draft of the Advocate Protection Bill, 2024 to the applicant,' the court directed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
MMDR Amendment Bill to boost jobs, accelerate critical mineral exploration: Standing Committee Member
BJP MP and Standing Committee on Coal, Mines & Steel member Roopkumari Choudhary has said the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Amendment Bill, 2025, passed by the Lok Sabha on Tuesday, will strengthen state rights, generate employment, and bolster the economy through more efficient use of mineral resources. Choudhary told ANI that the legislation grants states greater authority over mining, including the right to sell mining waste, boosting local revenues and aiding environmental management. States will also have a role in the proposed mineral exchange to monitor production, reserves, and sales. 'This Bill significantly enhances states' rights, promotes employment, and strengthens the economic condition by enabling better utilisation of mineral resources,' she said. The amendments aim to simplify the mining regime, promote zero-waste mining, and advance the objectives of the National Critical Mineral Mission (NCMM), given the growing importance of minerals such as lithium, graphite, nickel, and cobalt for electric vehicles, battery manufacturing, and high-tech industries. Key provisions include raising National Mineral Exploration Trust funding from 2 per cent to 3 per cent, expanding lease areas by up to 30 per cent, allowing sale of 100 per cent captive mine output with additional royalty, and permitting private players and FDI in critical mineral exploration. The Bill also enables offshore exploration and foreign critical mineral projects. Union Coal and Mines Minister G Kishan Reddy told the House that the legislation will help address global supply chain constraints in critical minerals and boost domestic exploration. Under the NCMM, the Geological Survey of India is tasked with 1,200 exploration projects from 2024-25 to 2030-31.
Indian Express
6 hours ago
- Indian Express
Push for transparency: What Supreme Court's order on Bihar SIR says
The Supreme Court on Thursday issued an interim order directing the Election Commission of India (ECI) to make available online a searchable list of approximately 65 lakh voter names omitted from the draft electoral roll for Bihar, along with reasons for deletion, such as death, migration, and duplication. The interim order pushes for greater transparency in the ongoing Special Intensive Revision (SIR) in Bihar, and partially addresses the contentious issue of including Aadhaar as a valid proof of identity and residence in the process. Here's a breakdown of the order, and its impact on the SIR. With the state set to head to polls in November, the ECI announced the Bihar SIR late in June. It said that demographic changes in the last 20 years meant that current electoral rolls contained many 'repeated entries', and 'the situation [warranted] an intensive verification drive to verify each person before enrolment as an elector'. Soon after this announcement, multiple petitioners challenged the SIR on both substantive and procedural grounds. The substantive grounds included questions on the ECI's powers to conduct such an exercise. The procedural grounds pertain ed to the modalities of conducting the SIR, including whether the 11 documents notified by the ECI to prove 'citizenship' were valid; whether the 2003 voter list could be a valid cut-off date for inclusion; and whether Aadhaar could be excluded as a valid proof of identity for inclusion in the voters' list. These issues are yet to be determined by the apex court. However, in oral observations, the SC has indicated that ECI has the power to conduct such an exercise. This can also be inferred from the fact that the SC has allowed the SIR to continue. 'You (ECI) are exercising the power of intensive survey as a preliminary enquiry into every voter identity. The powers [to do so] are prima facie traceable, so we do not wish to interdict…but your manner has to be reasonable, has to give certain comfort to citizens,' Justice Joymalya Bagchi, one of the two judges hearing the case, said. This essentially leaves the procedural aspects of conducting the SIR still open for adjudication. The ECI had, in its affidavit, told the SC that it was not required by law to publish a separate list of electors removed from the draft electoral rolls or to provide reasons for their non-inclusion. This was in opposition to a plea by the Association for Democratic Reforms seeking the release of names and details of the 65 lakh electors who did not make it to the draft published on August 1. The ECI, in court, cited apprehensions that political parties might aggregate the data and that the publication could be a violation of the fundamental right to privacy. The SC has, however, pushed back on this argument, underlining a citizen's fundamental right to know why he or she has been deleted from the voter list. The court has directed the ECI to publish lists in which one can search by entering the EPIC number whether a voter has been deleted, and the reasons for such deletion. The lists are required to be booth-wise, and also have to be displayed on the notice board of respective Panchayat Bhavans and offices of the Block Development Officer or Panchayat Officers. This essentially enables individuals and political parties to check if a voter from the constituency has been removed from the rolls, and whether this exclusion is justified. As per the ECI, 7.24 crore of the 7.90 crore total voters have filled their forms in the SIR process. Of the 65 lakh individuals who have not been included in the draft rolls, 22 lakh are dead, the ECI said. The ECI had said that those whose names have not been included in the draft roll can submit Form 6, the ECI's form for registration of new electors, by September 1. Incidentally, Form 6 allows Aadhaar, both as proof of identity and residence for enrolment. The Electoral Registration Officer verifies the information submitted in Form 6, and enrols a new voter. In its interim order, the SC directed that 'aggrieved persons may submit their claims along with a copy of their Aadhaar Card'. That said, whether this means that Aadhaar can be a valid document to be included as a voter again is still unclear. In its oral observations, the court said that 'these are issues for the next stage'. The court will hear the case again on August 22, and the issue of how to handle unfair exclusions is likely to be brought up then.
The Hindu
6 hours ago
- The Hindu
Bombay High Court issues sitting list for newly constituted Kolhapur Circuit Bench from August 18
The Bombay High Court on Thursday (August 14, 2025) issued the sitting list for the newly constituted Circuit Bench at Kolhapur with effect from August 18, 2025. The Bench will be inaugurated by Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai on August 17 at 3:30 p.m. According to the notification dated August 14, 2025, the Division Bench comprising Justice M.S. Karnik and Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh (Court Room No. 1) will take up, for admission, hearing, order matters and applications of all public interest litigations; civil writ petitions; first appeals; family court appeals; contempt appeals; writ petitions, applications and references relating to tax laws; under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015; letters patent appeals; criminal writ petitions; criminal applications under Section 482 of Cr.P.C./528 of BNNS; criminal appeals; confirmation of death sentence cases with connected appeals; criminal appeals under special statutes pertaining to the Division Bench; criminal contempt petitions; criminal references; all writ petitions relating to furlough, parole, remission and commutation of sentence/premature release; and all other civil and criminal work pertaining to the Division Bench from Kolhapur, Satara, Sangli, Solapur, Ratnagiri and Sindhudurg. The Single Benches will be presided over by Justice Shivkumar Dige (Court Room No. 2) and Justice S.G. Chapalgaonkar (Court Room No. 3). Justice Dige will hear criminal appeals; criminal writ petitions pertaining to Single Bench; criminal applications under Section 482 of Cr.P.C./528 of BNNS pertaining to Single Bench; all criminal revision applications; all regular bail applications; all anticipatory bail applications; all first appeals; all miscellaneous civil applications; and all other criminal work pertaining to Single Bench. He is appointed to hear and decide matters under the arbitration and conciliation Act, 1996. Justice Chapalgaonkar will hear all civil writ petitions pertaining to Single Bench; second appeals; civil revision applications; appeals against orders; and all other civil work pertaining to Single Bench. He is appointed to hear and decide the matters under the Companies Act, 1956, the Companies Act, 2013 and the Banking Regulation Act, 1949. The note to the sitting list states that matters wherein the Apex Court has passed an order for expeditious or time-bound hearing, and matters of senior citizens or marginalised sections, will be given priority. Criminal appeals pending for more than five years in which the accused is in jail will also be given priority. It further provides that all judges designated to try election petitions under the Representation of the People Act, 1951, shall assign a date in the week to deal with such petitions; contempt petition (civil) will be taken up by the concerned Bench before which the main matter is pending; and upon change of roster, part-heard matters shall stand released unless all parties jointly request retention and the Chief Justice approves.
