SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
BELA M. TRIVEDI, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, JJ.
Supreme Court Bar Association & Anr. – Appellant
Vs.
State Of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. – Respondent
Miscellaneous Application No. 3-4 Of 2025 in Crl.A. No.3883-3884 Of 2024
Decided On : 23-01-2025
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points summarized:
The applications filed by the Supreme Court Bar Association and the Supreme Court Advocates On-Record Association seek permission to intervene in ongoing criminal appeals and request modifications to the court’s judgment regarding the independence of CBI investigations (!) .
The applicants aim to ensure that the CBI’s investigation remains independent and uninfluenced by prior observations made in the court’s judgment, particularly those specified in certain paragraphs (!) .
The applicants also seek clarification or inclusion of advocates who have assisted in case preparation or briefing, emphasizing the importance of recognizing contributions made by advocates from the offices of senior advocates (!) .
The court acknowledged that, despite questions of locus standi, the associations’ wider implications on the legal profession justify permitting them to address the court, especially given the role of advocates in maintaining legal integrity (!) (!) .
The court clarified that the observations made in the judgment are prima facie and should not influence the CBI’s independent investigation, which must be conducted in accordance with law (!) .
The court emphasized that the CBI is required to carry out its inquiry without bias and to take action against those responsible for any crimes, ensuring the investigation’s independence (!) .
The associations expressed their commitment to promoting professional competence and integrity within the legal profession and proposed to present concrete proposals at a future hearing to support this goal (!) .
The court scheduled the next hearing for the applications on a specified date, allowing further proceedings to be conducted (!) .
The court permitted the senior advocate, despite the locus standi concerns, to address the court given his role and the broader implications for the legal fraternity (!) (!) .
Please let me know if you need any further analysis or specific legal advice regarding this case.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applications to intervene and clarify judgment (Para 1) |
| 2. locus standi of applicants and cbi's investigative independence (Para 2 , 3) |
| 3. court permits address despite locus issues (Para 4) |
| 4. commitment of associations to legal integrity (Para 5) |
| 5. next hearing date for applications set (Para 6) |
ORDER :
IA No. 239214/2024, IA No. 283438/2024 and IA No. 283437/2024
1. These applications have been filed by the applicants- Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) And Supreme Court Advocates On-Record Association (SCAORA) in Miscellaneous Application Nos. 3-4/2025, seeking permission to intervene in the matter and seeking clarification/ modification of the judgment dated 20.09.2024 passed in Crl. Appeal Nos.3883-3884 of 2024. Following prayers have been sought in the M.A. No.3- 4/2025.
b) Modify/Clarify the directions passed in Para-42 of the order to the extent that the names of those Advocates should also be included who have assisted the Advocate on Record in preparation of the case and/or have briefed the arguing counsel or Senior Advocate and/or are from the office of the Senior Advocate assisting on the matter.”
2. At the outset, in response to the query put forth by the Court as to what locus standi the applicants have to file these Interlocutory Applications/ Miscellaneous Applications in a disposed of Criminal Appeals being Crl. Appeal Nos.3883-3884/2024, the learned Senior Advocate, Mr. Kapil Sibal, appearing for the applicants fairly conceded that in normal circumstances the applicants would not have the locus standi, however he earnestly urged to permit him to address the Court, submitting that both the applicants – Associations are working for the welfare of the Bar, and the judgment in question has a wide repercussions on the Advocates practicing in the Supreme Court and on the legal profession as a whole.
3. He further submitted that so far as prayer clause (a) sought in M.A. is concerned, it may be clarified that the observations made in the judgment are prima facie and may not influence the CBI in carrying out the investigation independently.
4. Since, Mr. Kapil Sibal, is not only the Senior Advocate but is also the President of the SCBA, we permitted him to address the Court without being technical as to the locus standi of the applicants. Considering his earnest request, however without diluting the tenor and effect of the directions given and observations made in the judgment dated 20.09.2024, we may clarify that the CBI shall carry out the Inquiry/ Investigation independently and in accordance with law and register the case against the persons who are found involved and responsible for the commission of the alleged crimes.
5. So far as the prayer clause (b) is concerned, learned Senior Advocate, Mr. Kapil Sibal, submitted that the Members of both the Associations i.e. SCBA and SCORA, are committed to the cause of justice and are also committed to promote professional competence and maintain professional integrity, and to prevent unethical practices affecting the legal profession. He submitted that on the next date of hearing, the applicants shall come out with some concrete proposal for taking steps/ action for the promotion and improvement of the professional competence, which in turn would help in maintaining the professional integrity for the larger cause of justice.
6. In view of the said submission, list the applications before the same combination of Bench on 30.01.2025 at 02:00 p.m.
The court affirmed the independence of CBI investigations, clarifying that prior observations should not influence ongoing inquiries, while acknowledging advocates' contributions to professional inte....
Right of appearance of Advocates – Right of an Advocate to appear for a party and to practise in courts is coupled with duty to remain present in court at the time of hearing, and to participate and ....
Consistency in the assignment of bail applications arising from the same FIR must be maintained to avoid judicial discrepancies.
Summary proceedings under Section 384 BNSS for courtroom misconduct valid if cognizance before rising of Court; inherent powers not to quash show cause notices where allegations disclose offence prim....
Advocates-on-record must ensure accurate representation of facts in legal filings, with potential disciplinary actions for misrepresentation, highlighting the need for guidelines on their conduct.
Inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot be invoked by absconding accused to quash proceedings; non-cooperation in investigation disqualifies them from relief.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.