P&H HC: Eyewitness Account Not Credible if Eyewitness Directly Identifies Accused in Court  ||  Delhi HC: Conditions u/s 45 PMLA Have to Give Way to Article 21 When Accused Incarcerated for Long  ||  Delhi High Court: Delhi Police to Add Grounds of Arrest in Arrest Memo  ||  Kerala High Court: Giving Seniority on the Basis of Rules is a Policy Decision  ||  Del. HC: Where Arbitrator has Taken Plausible View, Court Cannot Interfere u/s 34 of A&C Act  ||  Ker. HC: No Question of Estoppel Against Party Where Error is Committed by Court Itself  ||  Supreme Court: Revenue Entries are Admissible as Evidence of Possession  ||  SC: Mere Breakup of Relationship Between Consenting Couple Can’t Result in Criminal Proceedings  ||  SC: Bar u/s 195 CrPC Not Attracted Where Proceedings Initiated Pursuant to Judicial Order  ||  NTF Gives Comprehensive Suggestions on Enhancing Better Working Conditions of Medical Professions    

Madras HC to Suo Motu Test Constitutional Validity of Section 36B of Advocates Act, 1961 - (02 Mar 2020)

CONSTITUTION

Madras High Court has decided to suo moto consider the validity of Section 36B of the Advocates Act, 1961, in as much as it stipulates that in case a Disciplinary inquiry against an Advocate is not completed by the State Bar Council within stipulated time, the same shall stand transferred to the Bar Council of India.

Tags : MADRAS HIGH COURT   CONSTITUTIONAL VALIDITY OF SECTION 36B OF THE ADVOCATES ACT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved