List of Current Affairs

Why in News?

• Recently, the Supreme Court has published new guidelines to govern how lawyers would be appointed as Senior Advocates in the Apex Court, titled “Guidelines for Designation of Senior Advocates by the Supreme Court of India, 2023”.
• The new guidelines will supersede the earlier guidelines issued by the Supreme Court in the year 2018.

Background

• The new guidelines have been framed two months after a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court passed its verdict in May 2023 in the case of Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India.
• Reasons for the change in the guidelines:
  • In February 2023, the Central Government sought to change guidelines for the designation of senior lawyers and so it filed an application for modification before the Supreme Court.
  • The Centre said that the current requirements for designation are extraneous and have resulted in ousting otherwise eligible candidates based on factors that are not germane to the issue of being designated as a Senior Advocate.

Court’s Observations

The Court has directed that Advocates-on-Record/Advocates who had applied for conferment of designation as Senior Advocate have to either of the following:

• To update their previous applications pending for consideration of the Permanent Committee by furnishing additional information/data in the newly prescribed format or;
• To substitute their applications by submitting fresh applications in the new prescribed format, or;
• To withdraw their applications by 7th August 2023 without, in any manner, affecting their entitlement to apply for designation to any High Court or to the Supreme Court, as and when application would be invited in future.

Legal Provisions

The 2023 Guidelines

• Eligibility Criteria
  • The guidelines prescribe a minimum age of 45 years to apply for the senior gown. But this restriction will not apply if the name has been recommended by the Chief Justice of India (CJI) or a judge of the Supreme Court.
    • The age criterion may also be relaxed by the Supreme Court Committee that decides on senior designations.
  • At least 10 years standing as an advocate or at least 10 years combined standing as an advocate and a District and Sessions Judge/ as a Judicial Member of any Tribunal whose eligibility criteria for appointment is not less than what is required for appointment as a District Judge.
  • The candidate's practice should be mainly before the Supreme Court.
• Point-based system for evaluation of proposals
  • The Supreme Court has revised the point-system for evaluating candidates. The points accorded for academic publications have been reduced to 5. The number of points given for judgments has been increased from the earlier 40 to 50 points.
  • This point-based system runs as follows:
    • 20 points for the number of years of practice from the date of enrolment.
    • 50 points for judgments reported and unreported (excluding orders that do not lay down any principle of law).
    • 5 points for the publication of academic articles, experience of teaching assignments in the field of law, guest lectures delivered in law schools and professional institutions connected with law.
    • 25 points for the test of personality and suitability on the basis of interview for a holistic assessment of the applicant.
• Applications to be invited at least once a year
  • The Secretariat of the Committee will initiate the process for designation of Senior Advocate at least once every year by inviting applications from Advocates-on-Record/ Advocates for designation as Senior Advocates.
  • The Secretariat will publish the proposals received for designation on the official website of the Supreme Court and invite suggestions/views of other stakeholders on the proposals for designation.
• Committee for Designation of Senior Advocates
  • Matters relating to the designation of Senior Advocates will be dealt with by the Permanent Committee known as the Committee for Designation of Senior Advocates (Committee).
  • This Committee will have 5 members, namely the Chief Justice of India (Chairperson), two senior-most Supreme Court judges, the Attorney General for India, and one member from the Bar who is nominated by the other members of the committee.
  • The Committee will meet twice a year and have a permanent secretariat, whose members will be decided by the Chief Justice of India in consultation with the other members of the Committee.

The 2018 Guidelines

• In 2018, the Supreme Court released “Guidelines to Regulate the Conferment of Designation of Senior Advocates”.
• These guidelines discouraged the system of voting by secret ballot, except in cases where it was “unavoidable.”
• A Committee for Designation of Senior Advocates was created under the chair of the Chief Justice of India (CJI) and consists of two senior-most Supreme Court judges, the Attorney General of India, and a member of the Bar nominated by the chair and other members.
• The CJI or any other judge could recommend the name of an advocate for the designation of senior lawyers.
• Advocates could also submit their applications to the committee, after which the committee members would evaluate them on several criteria like 10-20 years of legal practice, be it as an advocate, district judge, or judicial member of an Indian tribunal where qualification for eligibility is not less than that prescribed for a district judge.

Prior to the 2018 Guidelines

• Prior to this, Section 16 of the Advocates Act 1961 governed the appointment of the Senior Advocates.
• Section 16 (1) stated that there shall be two classes of advocates, namely, senior advocates and other advocates.
• Section 16 (2) allowed an advocate to be designated as a senior advocate if the Supreme Court or a High Court was of the opinion that by virtue of his ability, standing at the Bar, or special knowledge or experience in law, he is deserving of such distinction.

Why in News?

• A Delhi court has sent a businessman to judicial custody for 14 days in connection with the Delhi excise policy case.
• The accused was represented in the court at the end of his remand period by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

Background

• The accused was arrested by the ED on 6th July 2023.
• The counsel for the accused argued that since the accused was an approver in the CBI case, he should not be kept in a jail cell housing the other co-accused.
• The ED's representatives submitted to the court that during custody, he was interrogated.
• It was further revealed by the agency representative that some crucial facts were disclosed by the accused on which operations are being carried out in NCR (National Capital Region) and that he was not required for further interrogation, but claimed that if released, he may tamper with the evidence, influence the witnesses, or flee from justice.

Court’s Observations

• The court, while directing jail authorities to keep the accused in a separate jail where other accused are not present has kept the next day of hearing as 25th July 2023.

Legal Provisions

• Custody – It means apprehending someone for protective care.
• Police Custody - It is the custody of a suspect with the police in a jail at the police station, to detain the suspect. The officer in charge of the case is required to produce the suspect before the appropriate judge within 24 hours, this time duration excludes the time necessary for journey from the police station to the court.
• Judicial Custody – Under this the accused is in the custody of the Magistrate concerned and is lodged in jail.

Criminal Law Aspect

• The Concept of Police Remand is provided under Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC).

Section 167 - Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty-four hours

(1) Whenever any person is arrested and detained in custody, and it appears that the investigation cannot be completed within the period of twenty-four hours fixed by section 57, and there are grounds for believing that the accusation or information is well-founded, the officer in charge of the police station or the police officer making the investigation, if he is not below the rank of sub-inspector, shall forthwith transmit to the nearest Judicial Magistrate a copy of the entries in the diary hereinafter prescribed relating to the case, and shall at the same time forward the accused to such Magistrate.

• Remand application under S.167(1) is made by the officer in charge of the police station or the person making the investigation, if he is not below the rank of the sub inspector.
• The maximum duration for which police custody can be granted by a Judicial Magistrate is 15 days in aggregate according to Section 167(2).
• The object behind remand is to shift the accused from such a place where an arrest has been made to the place where he is to be tried.
• In Ram Doss v. State of Tamil Nadu (1992), it was held by the court that before granting remand under Section 167, the Magistrate must keep in mind:
• The reason for detaining the accused even after 24 hours and on what basis of material the accused is to be kept in police custody.
• Whether there exists cognizable offence in the report.
• Whether the registration of the case has been done for the investigation.
• The presence of accused either physically or virtually is a sine qua non (indispensable requirement) at the time of remand of the accused u/s 167 of CrPC.
• In Jigar alias Jimmy Pravinchandra Adatiya v. State of Gujarat (2022) the Supreme Court has held that failure to produce accused before Court while considering application for extension of time to investigate amounts to violation of his fundamental rights.
• Judicial Custody according to Section 167(2) of CrPC can be granted for:
• Ninety days, where the investigation relates to an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years;
• Sixty days, where the investigation relates to any other offence.
• On the expiry of the said period of ninety days, or sixty days, as the case may be, the accused person shall be released on bail if he is prepared to and does furnish bail.
• Detention by Executive Magistrate - According to Section 167(2A) if the accused is forwarded to Executive Magistrate, and thereupon such Executive Magistrate, may, for reasons to be recorded in writing, authorize the detention of the accused person in such custody as he may think fit for a term not exceeding seven days in the aggregate.

Constitutional Law Aspect

Article 22 of the Constitution of India, 1950 gives the person arrested a twofold protection:

1. That an arrested person shall not be detained in custody without being told the grounds of such an arrest and that he shall be entitled to consult and to be defended by a legal practitioner of his choice.
2. Article 22 (2) provides that every person who is arrested and detained in custody must be produced before the nearest Magistrate within 24 hours excluding the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Court of Magistrate and that no such person shall be detained in custody beyond the said period without the authority of a Magistrate.