The Supreme Court on Friday observed that there was a need to establish institutes to train advocates before they begin practice, along the lines of judicial academies for judges in India.A bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal noted in other countries, it was an accepted norm for lawyers to secure certificates from such training academies to be able to practice."If judges and magistrates have judicial academy, why not for lawyers? Not just prosecutors but every lawyer unless they have a certificate from a recognised law academy should not be allowed to practice. This is there in foreign countries," Justice Trivedi remarked.The bench was hearing a bail plea by Souvik Bhattacharya, son of Trinamool Congress State legislator Manik Bhattacharya, when it noticed some lapses on the part of the lawyers who handled the case at the trial court stage.The records revealed that the accused had surrendered before the trial court even though no summons was issued to him by the trial court. The court below had also taken cognisance of the money-laundering case.That trial court eventually rejected the bail plea, which was confirmed by the Calcutta High Court. This led to an appeal before the apex court.
No violation of Section 19 PMLA if ED informs accused about grounds of arrest within 24 hours: Supreme CourtSenior Advocate Sidharth Luthra represented the accused in the case and concurred with the Court's remarks.He conceded that it was a mistake by his client's earlier counsel to have let him (the accused) surrender and file a bail plea without a summons.The top court proceeded to adjourn the matter by a week to allow counsel for the Enforcement Directorate to get instructions on the validity of the trial court order.It orally indicated that it was inclined to grant the accused interim bail and remit the matter to the trial court to be decided afresh on merits.
TAGS: Supreme Court Advocates' training institutes Judicial academies Legal education
