whatsapp x

WhatsApp Number

8750970582

Message
phone x
8750970582
email x
info@lawminds.co.in

SC terms curative plea against 2013 verdict on criminalising samesex infructuous

In New Delhi, on Thursday, the Supreme Court declared curative petitions filed against the December 11, 2013, judgment, which criminalized homosexuality under Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code, as moot in light of the 2018 judgment by a Constitution bench. Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, along with Justices B R Gavai, Bela Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, and Manoj Misra, comprising a five-judge bench, concluded the proceedings on the curative petitions.

The bench stated, “We will say the curative petitions have been rendered infructuous by the judgment delivered by this court in Navtej Johar.” In the Naz Foundation Vs Union of India case, the Delhi High Court had in 2009 invalidated Section 377 IPC. However, in 2013, a two-judge bench of the Supreme Court, in Suresh Kumar Koushal Vs Naz Foundation, overturned the Delhi High Court’s decision, affirming the validity of the penal provision. Subsequently, in January 2014, the Supreme Court dismissed a series of review petitions.

In 2018, responding to a batch of writ petitions, a five-judge Constitution bench of the Supreme Court in Navtej Singh Johar Vs Union of India ruled that consensual same-sex relations among adults could not be deemed criminal. The court then struck down the provision to that extent, asserting that “Constitutional morality cannot be equated to a majoritarian view. The LGBT community possesses the same rights as any citizens of the country.”

However, the curative petitions filed in 2014 against the 2013 Suresh Koushal judgment remained pending until now. A curative petition serves as the final judicial recourse for addressing grievances in court, typically decided by judges in-chamber. In rare instances, such petitions may undergo an open court hearing.

Foreign law firms’ entry in India: Delhi HC seeks BCI’s response in plea challenging move

In New Delhi, the Delhi High Court has issued a notice in response to a plea challenging a notification released by the Bar Council of India (BCI) last year, which allowed the entry of foreign law firms and lawyers into India. The court, presided over by Acting Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, has summoned responses from both the BCI and the central government.

The court has set April 24 as the date for the hearing, seeking the BCI’s perspective on the plea. The case revolves around the Rules for Registration and Regulation of Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms in India, 2022, introduced by the BCI last year. These rules permit the registration and practice of non-litigious law matters in India by foreign lawyers.

The plea questions the BCI’s authority under the Advocates Act of 1961 to grant such permissions, contending that, according to the current law, only advocates enrolled with the BCI are authorized to practice law in India.

Initially, the Bar Council of India opposed the entry of foreign lawyers and law firms in any form. However, in Joint Consultative Conferences between 2007-14, it was collectively decided by the BCI, State Bar Councils, and other stakeholders to explore this avenue. In September 2022, discussions between representatives from the Law Society of England and Wales, the U.K. government’s international trade department, and Indian law firm representatives took place, advocating for the removal of restrictions on foreign lawyers practicing in India.

In response, the BCI issued rules in March 2023, permitting foreign lawyers and law firms to practice foreign law, international law, and international arbitration matters in India, strictly under the principle of reciprocity. Notably, they are not allowed to appear in Indian courts. However, the plea raises concerns about the absence of a mutual arrangement between India and the countries whose law firms are permitted to operate in India, arguing that the BCI’s decision violates the principle of reciprocity. The plea emphasizes that opening up law practice in India to foreign lawyers will contribute to the growth of the legal profession in the country.