The Karnataka High Court held that advocates practising law without clearing the All India Bar Examination (AIBE) may face criminal prosecution. The Court clarified that disciplinary proceedings by the Bar Council do not preclude private individuals from initiating criminal action against such practitioners.
Judgement
Justice H.P. Sandesh ruled that a private complaint against an advocate for practising without the AIBE qualification is maintainable and that the Bar Council's authority does not bar criminal proceedings.
The Supreme Court ruled that a private individual can file a criminal complaint under Section 200 of the CrPC for offences punishable under Section 125-A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. The court held that the bar under Section 195 of the CrPC, which typically requires a public servant to file a complaint for certain offences, does not apply to this specific provision.
The Karnataka High Court ruled that criminal proceedings cannot be utilized to secure an advantage in a pending partition suit. The court cancelled the criminal property case, emphasizing that such disputes are civil in nature and must be resolved in civil courts.
The Allahabad High Court addressed whether a transgender woman can invoke Section 69 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) in a case involving an alleged sexual relationship based on a false promise of marriage. The Court held that a transgender woman, even post-sex-reassignment surgery, does not fall within the statutory definition required to invoke Section 69 BNS, which pertains to sexual intercourse by corrupt means or by false promise.
The Karnataka High Court rejected a plea to quash criminal proceedings initiated against an advocate who had been practicing for a decade without having cleared the All India Bar Examination (AIBE). The court further directed the Bar Council to establish a mechanism to identify and prevent legal practice by individuals who have not qualified in the examination.
The Karnataka High Court has held that a private complainant can set the criminal law in motion against an advocate who practises without clearing the All India Bar Examination (AIBE), and that the Bar Council’s disciplinary powers do not bar criminal proceedings. Justice H.P. ]
The High Court further directed the State Bar Council to track and identify those who are practising without clearing the AIBE within the specified period.
Updates are aggregated by AI from reputable news and court records and may contain errors. Always verify against the linked primary source.
People named in a case are accused, not guilty. Under Indian law everyone is presumed innocent until convicted by a court.
This case has been checked against 3 sources, and is re-read whenever it moves. That work is paid for by readers, not by anyone with a stake in the outcome. What that costs
Discussion
No comments yet.
Follow this case to join the discussion.