NO EXEMPTION FOR LAW MAKERS FROM COMPLIANCE WITH RULES
The net outcome of such senseless debate, if it is to be called so, has been degradation of the good image of the country. True, the elected public representatives do have a right to question the government of the day, but it does not give them a free handle to behave in an unbecoming manner. If the treasury benches have committed any wrong, the opposition has a right and responsibility to demand explanation from the government. At the same time, the opposition parties too, are under a pious obligation to maintain the age-old traditions of the constitutional democracy. The rules of business framed long ago by the distinguished parliamentarians most of whom were the celebrated heroes of the Independence struggle, have to be observed meticulously by all the members of parliament.
Shouting at the high pitch, using derogatory and even abusive language towards other members and belittling the other side, are not the signs of a matured and participatory democracy. These bickerings not only put a serious question mark on our system of governance, but also inflict a deep wound on it. Certainly, such a situation does not augur well for us as a civilised, matured and illustrious nation. Not that the seasoned political leaders are not aware of such a collateral damage, but for the vested political reasons they prefer to keep mum instead of working out a long-lasting solution. When the parties prefer to play the hide and seek, who will take initiative to resolve such an unsavory situation to recur in future.
Apparently, the onus would fall on the judiciary which is capable of setting right the erring, arrogant and uncontrollable political horses. The people have complete faith in judiciary. The judiciary should in the larger public interest and to protect the rule of law, should in the right earnest take suo motu cognisance of the goings on in the citadel of our democracy before it becomes too late and compel the unbridled horses who take law in hands in utter disregard to the well-established parliamentary procedures.
It is unfortunate that nowadays almost in all public houses, right from parliament to municipal and Panchayat bodies, lawlessness rules the roost. What was considered as an exceptional situation some years ago, now has become a routine affair. Nation cannot tolerate it anymore. Therefore, it is high time that the judiciary intervenes immediately to protect the democratic norms and reassure the people that there is a watch dog of democracy, before it is too late.
Entry Of Foreign Lawyers
The much-awaited decision on allowing the foreign lawyers in India to guide their clients in the matters pertaining to arbitration, claims and disputes with any Indian entity has atlast been announced by the Bar Council of India (BCI). Going by the detailed guidelines notified by the BCI, such permission to the foreign lawyers and law entities will be on the reciprocal basis. The foreign lawyers will be required to enroll with the BCI and they will be under the regulatory control of the BCI. The foreign lawyers will not be allowed to argue any case in the court but they can advise their clients in ensuring compliance of the laws. Indeed, this is a progressive step which will go a long way in widening the scope of legal practice for the lawyers in India.
Law Doesn't Exempt The law Makers From Compliance!
In a startling accusation the Union Law Minister Kiran Rijiju said that some of the retired judges are anti-India and they have even asked the courts to take head on against the government! The Law Minister who was participating in the India Today's conclave regretted that by such anti -India stance, some of the former judges were indirectly supporting the divisive forces like the Tukde Tukde gangs. Interestingly, the Chief Justice of India D.Y Chandrachud has denied the allegation of any pressure on the courts from the government and said that the independence of judiciary is intact.
Sc On Section 138 Ni Act
In a recent judgement the Supreme Court has held that approval of bankruptcy plan under IBC,2016 will not extinguish criminal liability of the company's director under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.A three -judge bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice Abhay S Oka and Justice J.B Pardiwalà held that a director who is a signatory to a dishonored cheque cannot seek discharge on this count.
Unaided Schools' Rights
In a balancing act between the right of private educational institution to charge the fees to students and the power of the public authorities to regulate the fee structure, Justice Narula of the Delhi High Court has recently ruled that there is nothing wrong in a private unaided school charging little more fee and utilising the excess for developing the facilities and services of the school. In a case entitled, Mahavir SrSchool and another Vs. Department of Education, the court allowed the appeal filed by the school management against the order rejecting the enhanced fee structure proposed by the school management.