*Landmark Judgment by the Supreme Court

*Landmark Judgment by the Supreme Court: Right to Free Legal Aid for Prisoners*
Suhas Chakma vs. Union of India & Ors. (Writ Petition No. 1082 of 2020)

- *Key Directions:*

- *Strengthening Legal Aid System*: Authorities are directed to strengthen the legal aid system in prisons, ensuring every prisoner has access to a lawyer regardless of financial standing.
- *Training of Legal Aid Lawyers*: Continuous training programs should be conducted for legal aid lawyers to keep them updated on legal developments and procedural nuances.
- *Monitoring Mechanisms*: Monitoring systems should be set up to track the progress of legal aid cases, ensuring prisoners' rights are not overlooked.
- *Awareness Campaigns*: Awareness campaigns should be conducted within prisons to inform inmates of their right to free legal aid.

*Importance of Legal Aid:*

- *Fundamental Right*: The judgment emphasizes that free legal aid is a fundamental right under Article 21 and Article 39-A of the Constitution, essential for a fair justice system.
- *Effective Legal Representation*: The court noted that "Legal Aid to Poor Should Not Be Poor Legal Aid," emphasizing the need for effective and competent legal representation.

*Case Details:*

- *Case Number*: Writ Petition No. 1082 of 2020
- *Judges*: Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
- *Date of Judgment*: October 23, 2024

This judgment is a significant step towards protecting prisoners' rights and ensuring they have equal access to the justice system.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

GOVT JOB OR PRIVATE JOB

Image
Lokayukta raid in Karnataka , where a former clerk, Kalakappa Nidagundi, from the Karnataka Rural Infrastructure Development Limited (KRIDL) was found to possess assets significantly disproportionate to his known income.  Here's a summary of the findings: Disproportionate Assets: Despite a modest monthly salary of ₹15,000, Nidagundi, a former daily-wage clerk in Koppal, was found to own assets worth over ₹30 crore during a Lokayukta raid. Seized Properties: The raid unearthed a vast amount of property including 24 residential houses, four plots, and 40 acres of agricultural land, registered in his name and those of his wife and brother. Other Valuables: Officials also seized 350 grams of gold, 1.5 kilograms of silver ornaments, and four vehicles (two cars and two two-wheelers) from his residence. Allegations of Fraud: Nidagundi, along with a former KRIDL engineer ZM Chincholkar, is accused of orchestrating a ₹72 crore scam by creating fake documents and bills for 96 incomplete infr...
Read more

That Res-judicata is a mixed question of law & fact and hence it cannot be decided as a preliminary issue under order XIV Rule 2 (2) of CPC.

Image
 *Headnotes*  - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ; Order XIV Rule 2 - The plea of res judicata in appropriate cases may be determined as preliminary issue when it is neither a disputed question of fact nor a mixed question of law and fact - Preliminary issues can be those where no evidence is required and on the basis of reading of the plaint or the applicable law, if the jurisdiction of the Court or the bar to the suit is made out, the Court may decide such issues with the sole objective for the expeditious decision. [Referred to Ramesh B. Desai and Ors. v. Bipin Vadilal Mehta and Ors (2006) 5 SCC 638 ] (Para 20, 30) - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 ; Order XIV Rule 2 , Order XX Rule 5, Order XLI Rules 24 & 25- To avoid the possibility of remanding back the matter after the decision on the preliminary issues, it is mandated for the trial court under Order XIV Rule 2 and Order XX Rule 5, and for the first appellate court in terms of Order XLI Rules 24 and 25 to rec...
Read more

How to become advocate on record complete procedure

Image
How to become advocate on the record complete procedure To become an **Advocate on Record (AOR) at the Supreme Court of India**, one must meet specific qualifications, undergo mandatory training, pass the AOR Examination, and fulfill a set of procedural requirements[1][2][3]. ## Eligibility Criteria - **Enrolment as Advocate:** Must be enrolled with any State Bar Council and be a practicing advocate[1][4][2]. - **Experience:** A minimum of 4 years of continuous practice is required before starting AOR training; total experience should be at least five years before applying for AOR status[1][2]. - **Training:** Must complete 1 year of training under a designated Advocate on Record after completing four years of practice[1][2][3]. ## Training Requirements - The candidate must work under an existing AOR for one year, learning Supreme Court procedures and practices[1][2][3]. - At the end of training, obtain a certificate from the AOR mentor[5]. ## Application and Examination Process - **Ap...
Read more