The Bar Council of India (BCI) has issued a press release slamming recently retired Justice J Chelameswar for speaking to the press after his retirement, explaining why he (and others) took the unprecedented step in January of calling a press conference criticising the conduct of their Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak Misra.

Even the dead have dignity: Supreme Court on revealing the name of rape victims

So, there’s been another press release by the Bar Council of India (BCI), in which chairman and senior counsel Manan Kumar Mishra shares several pearls of wisdom, criticising senior advocate Indira Jaising, which has been widely covered in the media (full release below).

The Supreme Court Advocates on Record (AOR) exam has produced the lowest pass rate in 4 years after it dropped down to 19%.

Senior advocate Arvind Nigam won temporary relief for Dushyant Dave who was to face disciplinary proceedings before the Gujarat bar council (SBC) for his alleged remarks before the Supreme Court in the judge BH Loya death case, reported PTI and others.

The Bar Council of India (BCI) cancelled the sudden press conference that it had called unexpectedly to announce its action against advocates who “create ugly scenes in courts”.

Senior advocate Indira Jaising has requested the Supreme Court to amend its order to reflect that she did not agree to the transfer of Bombay high court petitions to the apex court, since she was not appearing on behalf of the Bombay high court petitioners but “reminded the court” that she would be intervening on behalf of Admiral Ramdas.

At a time when the judiciary is arguably facing its greatest internal crisis in decades, Bar Council of India (BCI) chairman Manan Kumar Mishra has struck again, noting in a letter that “the entire institution is becoming a mockery at the hands of only 3-4 such Advocates” (yes advocates!) who create “ugly scenes in the courts every day”.

Judge BH Loya’s mysterious death was finally heard today for nearly an hour by the Supreme Court, under the shadow of the 12 January press conference of the Famous Four Judges, as well as Justice Arun Mishra’s equally mysterious recusal from hearing the case, after passing an order on 16 January.

The petition has just under 500 signatures at this time, and states: “I am Indira Jaising, a Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court of India. I have filed a public interest petition in the Supreme Court to live stream and video record cases of national interest that impact each one of us. The Supreme ...

JGLS Sonepat students were sentenced to 20 years in jail for raping a fellow student, reported The Tribune and Times of India several days ago.

For the last one-and-a-half-odd years, Nalsar Hyderabad has been avidly uploading mostly student-organised guest lectures to its YouTube channel, available to freely watch by all.

So, finally, the Delhi high court ruled in favour of the Lt. Governor of Delhi, Najeeb Jung, and the Central Government, in their turf war with Delhi’s Chief Minister, Arvind Kejriwal.

The hearing of the petition seeking right to worship to women at Sabarimala, Kerala, in the Supreme Court has often led to inquisitive questions from the bench about Hinduism, spirituality, and tradition.

The much awaited Delhi-Centre turf war case was finally heard today at court No 4 around noon as item 64, with the bench of justices Dipak Misra and UU Lalit giving the Delhi Government’s counsel, Indira Jaising, enough opportunity to make her submissions, but without compromising its position that it would not direct the high court to first decide the jurisdiction issue.

The Delhi-Centre turf war case, titled Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi vs Union of India, which was listed as item 45 at court no 2, after Justice Khehar-Arun Mishra bench recused from hearing it yesterday, suffered another phase of uncertainty this morning. At the mentioning time at Court No.2, one of the Judges on the bench at court No 2, Justice L Nageswara Rao recused himself from hearing the case for undisclosed reasons.

Item 72, listed as the last case before justices JS Khehar and Arun Mishra at Court No.3, was the one which everyone was waiting for.

>We are back to the intolerance of challenge. The Lawyers Collective posed no political challenge to the NDA, it cannot, but it seems that there is an intolerance of legal challenge within the NDA <

Lawyers Collective (LC) – the NGO founded by senior advocates and spouses Indira Jaising and Anand Grover – responded to the home ministry’s 6-month ban order on it receiving foreign funds, by claiming that the ban order was “a malafide act and an act of vindictiveness on the part of the Government” against which the NGO had fought several cases.

Senior advocate, Indira Jaising, amicus curiae in the case of Nipun Saxena v Union of India, was elated when Justice JS Khehar and Justice C Nagappan asked her and the UOI counsel on 2 May whether they would have time to attend to the case, if listed during the vacation.