SC seeks Centre, BCI response on PIL for four-year LLB course like B.Tech
Supreme Court
on Tuesday sought the response of the Centre, University Grants Commission and
Bar Council of India
on a PIL seeking a direction for setting up a
legal education commission
to review the syllabus, curriculum and duration of the
LLB and LLM courses
.
A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi sought the response of the Centre, UGC,
BCI
and Law Commission of India on the petition by September 9.
The top court directed the registry to list all the pending matters on the issue together on September 9.
The PIL filed by
Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay
urged the top court to direct to the Centre to set up a legal education commission or expert committee to review the syllabus, curriculum and duration of the
LLB
and LLM Courses and take appropriate steps to attract the best talent in the legal profession.
The plea further said, "
New Education Policy 2020
promotes four-year graduation courses in all professional and academic courses, but BCI has not taken appropriate steps to review the existing syllabus, curriculum and the duration of the LLB and LLM courses".
Live Events
It said the injury caused to the students is extremely large because the five-year duration of BA-LLB and BBA-LLB courses is disproportionate to the course material.
"The long period puts excessive financial burden on the middle and lower-class families and they are unable to bear such a heavy financial burden. It takes two more years for a student to become the bread-earner in his family," the plea said.
"B. Tech through IITs takes four years of non-superfluous education and that too in a specified field of engineering, whereas BA-LLB or BBА-LLB through the NLU's and various other affiliated colleges consumes five years of a student's precious life while providing knowledge of Arts /Commerce, an unrelated and superfluous stream. Hence, the existing five-year course needs to be reviewed by the experts," it said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
22 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Punish incestuous assault severely: SC
Incestuous sexual violence by a parent tears through the foundational fabric of familial trust and must invite the severest condemnation in both language and sentence, the Supreme Court held on Wednesday, dismissing a petition filed by a man convicted of repeatedly raping his minor daughter Punish incestuous assault severely: SC 'The home, which should be a sanctuary, cannot be permitted to become a site of unspeakable trauma, and the courts must send a clear signal that such offences will be met with an equally unsparing judicial response,' said a bench of justices Aravind Kumar and Sandeep Mehta. To entertain a plea for leniency in a case of this nature, the court stressed, would not merely be misplaced, but constitute a betrayal of the court's own constitutional duty to protect the vulnerable. 'When a child is forced to suffer at the hands of her own father, the law must speak in a voice that is resolute and uncompromising. There can be no mitigation in sentencing for crimes that subvert the very notion of family as a space of security,' said the bench, affirming the life sentence for the convict. Rejecting outright, the plea to consider his bail in the 2013 crime, the court added that any leniency in such cases would amount to 'a judicial insult to the sanctity of womanhood' and 'a betrayal of the constitutional promise made to every child of this country.' 'When a father who is expected to be a shield, a guardian, a moral compass, becomes the source of the most severe violation of a child's bodily integrity and dignity, the betrayal is not only personal but institutional. The law does not, and cannot, condone such acts under the guise of rehabilitation or reform,' it said. Upholding the Himachal Pradesh High Court's July 2024 judgment that affirmed the man's life sentence under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, the court said the case reflected a horrifying abuse of trust, where the father became the 'source of the most severe violation of a child's bodily integrity and dignity.' The court noted that the victim was around 10 years old when the assaults began, which were not isolated but sustained violations inside the home – 'a place where every child expects protection.' Referring to the father's repeated acts of aggravated penetrative sexual assault, the bench said the crime 'assumes a demonic character' when committed by a parent, and warrants the 'severest condemnation in both language and sentence.' 'No daughter, however aggrieved, would fabricate charges of this magnitude against her own father merely to escape household discipline,' observed the bench, rejecting the convict's claim that he was falsely implicated due to strained domestic relationships. It acknowledged that 'incestuous sexual violence constitutes a distinct category of offence that tears through the foundational fabric of familial trust', holding that such offences deserve nothing but the severest condemnation and deterrent punishment. 'To pardon such depravity under any guise would be a travesty of justice and a betrayal of the child protection mandate embedded in our constitutional and statutory framework,' maintained the bench, underlining the court's zero-tolerance approach. Reiterating that justice must not be limited to conviction, the court also emphasised the importance of restitution and rehabilitation, especially for child survivors. Invoking Article 142 of the Constitution, the bench directed the state of Himachal Pradesh to pay a compensation of ₹10.5 lakh to the now-major survivor, exceeding the maximum prescribed under the NALSA Compensation Scheme by 50% due to the gravity of the offence and age of the victim. Of this amount, ₹7 lakh is to be fixed in a nationalised bank for five years in the survivor's name, with quarterly interest accessible to her. The remaining ₹3.5 lakh is to be transferred directly to her account. The process will be monitored by the Himachal Pradesh State Legal Services Authority. 'In awarding this compensation, we reaffirm the constitutional commitment to protect the rights and dignity of child survivors, and to ensure that the justice delivered is substantive, compassionate and complete,' held the court.
Hindustan Times
22 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Vantara to set up elephant rehab facility in Kolhapur
Mumbai: Days after the court-ordered relocation of a 36-year-old arthritic elephant from a Jain shrine in Kolhapur to Vantara in Gujarat ignited a public outcry and protests, the Jamnagar-based animal rescue and conservation centre on Wednesday expressed regret over the matter and proposed to set up a satellite rehabilitation centre for the pachyderm at Nandani in Kolhapur district. Vantara to set up elephant rehab facility in Kolhapur Chief minister Devendra Fadnavis, who held a meeting with Vantara's chief executive officer, Vivaan Karani, on Wednesday, said the organisation has assured him that it would cooperate with the state government in the legal process to get the elephant, Mahadevi, back to Kolhapur. 'I had a detailed discussion in Mumbai with senior officials of the Vantara management. They have assured me that Vantara has decided to be a part of the petition that the Maharashtra government has resolved to file, seeking the safe return of the elephant Mahadevi to the Nandani Math. During the discussion, they informed me that they were only complying with the orders of the Supreme Court and had no intention of taking custody of Mahadevi on their own,' said Fadnavis on Wednesday. Later in the day, Vantara issued a statement saying it would extend full support to any application filed by the Jain shrine and the Maharashtra government before the court requesting Mahadevi's return to Kolhapur. 'Subject to the court's approval, Vantara will provide complete technical and veterinary assistance for her safe and dignified return,' the statement said. The centre managed by the Reliance Foundation also stressed that at no stage did it initiate or recommend the elephant's relocation, nor was there any intent to interfere with religious practice or sentiment. 'If our involvement, despite being carried out solely under court directions, has caused any distress to the Jain community or the people of Kolhapur, we express our sincere regret. Michhami Dukkadam—if any hurt was caused through thought, word, or deed, knowingly or unknowingly, we seek your forgiveness,' the statement added. Vantara also proposed to set up a satellite rehabilitation centre for Mahadevi, also known as Madhuri, in the Nandani area of Kolhapur, where the Jain shrine is located. The proposed facility will be developed in accordance with established animal welfare guidelines after consulting with experts and the consensus of the shrine, while aligned to international best practices in elephant care, the statement said. According to Vantara, the proposed elephant rehab centre at Nandani will include a specialised hydrotherapy pond for joint and muscular relief, a larger water body for swimming and natural movement, a laser therapy and treatment room for physical rehabilitation, a covered night shelter for rest and protection, a lush open-space habitat for unrestricted movement without chains, a sand pit for environmental enrichment and natural behaviours, a fully equipped veterinary clinic for 24x7 medical care, a rubberised flooring platform for safe and comfortable resting, carefully formed mounds of soft sand to support sloped resting positions, which would aide Mahadevi's recovery from foot rot and relieve pressure from arthritis. The land for the proposed facility will be identified in consultation with the Jain shrine and the Maharashtra government. Upon receiving the necessary grants and permissions, Vantara's team will begin the implementation in close coordination with relevant authorities, the organisation said. 'This proposal is not intended for any credit or recognition of Vantara. We remain fully open and respectful to any alternative proposal the Jain Matha may wish to put forward, in accordance with the final directions of the honourable court,' the statement said. After the meeting with Fadnavis, Vanatara's Karani went to Kolhapur to meet the chief of the Jain shrine, Jinsen Bhattarak Mahaswami, who expressed his satisfaction with the proposal. 'I welcome the approach of [Reliance Foundation director] Anant Ambani and give my blessing to him for returning Mahadevi and providing rehabilitation services at Nandani with the support of Vantara. After a legal process with the help of the Maharashtra government, Vantara and the forest department, Mahadevi will come back to Nandani,' he said. Congress MLC Satej Patil, who participated in the protest demanding Mahadevi's return to Nandani, welcomed the outcome of the meeting between the chief minister and Vantara, saying it was a victory of the unity of Kolhapur's people. 'I wholeheartedly welcome the decision of the Vantara management to rehabilitate Mahadevi, the elephant, in Kolhapur after the due legal process. Heartfelt thanks for everyone's support and to team Vantara,' he said. Mahadevi was with the Swastishri Jinsen Bhattarak Pattacharya Mahaswamy Sanstha at Nandani for over three decades. On July 16, the Bombay high court ordered her relocation to the Radhe Krishna Temple Elephant Welfare Trust in Jamnagar, managed by Vantara, after animal welfare organisations such as the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) underlined her poor health and argued that she was not getting proper care at the shrine. The shrine challenged the order, but the Supreme Court on July 25 upheld it, after which the elephant was moved from Nandani to the Jamnagar facility. Following Mahadevi's relocation, thousands of people in Kolhapur participated in protests demanding her return to the shrine.
Time of India
36 minutes ago
- Time of India
'I won't humiliate myself': Brazil's president sees no point in tariff talks with Trump
Live Events (You can now subscribe to our (You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel As U.S. tariffs on Brazilian goods jumped to 50% on Wednesday, Brazil 's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva told Reuters in an interview that he saw no room for direct talks now with U.S. President Donald Trump that would likely be a "humiliation."Brazil is not about to announce reciprocal tariffs, he said. Nor will his government give up on cabinet-level talks. But Lula himself is in no rush to ring the White House."The day my intuition says Trump is ready to talk, I won't hesitate to call him," Lula said in an interview from his presidential residence in Brasilia. "But today my intuition says he doesn't want to talk. And I won't humiliate myself."Despite Brazil's exports facing one of the highest tariffs imposed by Trump, the new U.S. trade barriers look unlikely to derail Latin America's largest economy, giving Lula more room to stand his ground against Trump than most Western described U.S.-Brazil relations at a 200-year nadir after Trump tied the new tariff to his demands for an end to the prosecution of right-wing former President Jair Bolsonaro, who is standing trial for plotting to overturn the 2022 president said Brazil's Supreme Court, which is hearing the case against Bolsonaro, "does not care what Trump says and it should not," adding that Bolsonaro should face another trial for provoking Trump's intervention, calling the right-wing former president a "traitor to the homeland.""We had already pardoned the U.S. intervention in the 1964 coup," said Lula, who got his political start as a union leader protesting against the military government that followed a U.S.-backed ouster of a democratically elected president."But this now is not a small intervention. It's the president of the United States thinking he can dictate rules for a sovereign country like Brazil. It's unacceptable."The Brazilian president said he had no personal issues with Trump, adding that they could meet at the United Nations next month or U.N. climate talks in November. But he noted Trump's track record of dressing down White House guests such as South African President Cyril Ramaphosa and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy."What Trump did with Zelenskiy was humiliation. That's not normal. What Trump did with Ramaphosa was humiliation," Lula said. "One president can't be humiliating another. I respect everyone and I demand respect."Lula said his ministers were struggling to open talks with U.S. peers, so his government was focused on domestic policies to cushion the economic blow of U.S. tariffs, while maintaining "fiscal responsibility."The president declined to elaborate on pending measures to support Brazilian companies, which are expected to include credit lines and other export also said he was planning to call leaders from the BRICS group of developing nations, starting with India and China, to discuss the possibility of a joint response to U.S. tariffs."There is no coordination among the BRICS yet, but there will be," Lula said, comparing multilateral action to the strength of collective bargaining in his union days. "What is the negotiating power of one little country with the United States? None."Separately, he said Brazil was looking at lodging a collective complaint with other countries at the World Trade Organization."I was born negotiating," said Lula, who was raised in poverty and rose through union ranks to serve two terms as president from 2003 to 2010, then re-entered politics in the 2022 election to defeat the incumbent he said he was in no rush to strike a deal or retaliate against U.S. tariffs: "We need to be very cautious," he about countermeasures targeting U.S. companies, such as greater taxation of big technology companies, Lula said his government was studying ways to tax U.S. firms on equal standing with Brazilian also described plans to create a new national policy for Brazil's strategic mineral resources, treating them as a matter of "national sovereignty" to break with a history of mining exports that added little value in Brazil.
