Last Updated on February 10, 2024 by News Desk
Issue:
In India, there are no legal education institutions comparable to judicial academies for judges. This presents a challenge for the Supreme Court.
Case facts:
Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal of the Supreme Court bench pointed out shortcomings in the trial court’s legal representation during a bail request hearing for Souvik Bhattacharya, the son of Trinamool Congress State lawmaker Manik Bhattacharya. up the trial court, the accused had notably shown himself up without getting a summons; yet, the judge continued the case and ultimately denied bail. There was an appeal to the Supreme Court after the High Court affirmed this ruling.
Arguments Presented by Parties:
The bench expressed worry about the lack of a comparable institution for attorneys, despite judges and magistrates receiving training at judicial schools. They emphasized how it is customary in other nations for attorneys to hold certifications from legal education institutions prior to entering the practice of law. To successfully practice law, the court proposed requiring all attorneys to earn certification from accredited law academies. This remark highlights the need of providing attorneys with thorough training in order to guarantee competence and compliance with legal protocols.
Judgment Delivered by the Court:
The Supreme Court underlined the necessity of creating legal education institutions akin to judicial academies for judges. They emphasized that the equitable administration of justice depends on guaranteeing attorneys’ expertise via formal training. The court considered the case’s facts and noted the legal representation’s shortcomings in considering the bail request. The particular ruling about the bail request is not disclosed, but the matter of training programs for attorneys was discussed, indicating a possible change in the legal system that would guarantee higher standards of legal service in India.
Written By: Nikita Shankar @nikitaashankar
