The Supreme Court of India raised concerns about alleged fake law degrees among lawyers practising in Delhi courts.
The bench indicated it may consider a Central Bureau of Investigation probe into the issue.
The court also criticised the petitioner’s conduct and made sharp remarks about activism and social media attacks on institutions.
CJI Flags Thousands of Fake Law Degrees, Mulls CBI Probe
The Chief Justice also said that he doesn’t expect the Bar Council of India to address the issue believing them to be in 'collusion' with such lawyers
Summary
The Chief Justice of India on Friday commented on the prevalence of fake LLB degrees of lawyers in Delhi courts, commenting that he is thinking of ordering a CBI investigation in to the issue. The Chief Justice also said that he doesn’t expect the Bar Council of India to address the issue believing them to be in 'collusion' with such lawyers.
A bench comprising CJI Surya Kant and Justice Jyomala Bagchi was hearing a petition filed by an advocate over the allotment of Senior Advocate status. While pulling up the petitioner for his past social media posts the CJI expressed doubt over the genuineness of the law degrees of “people who are wearing black robes.”
CJI Remarks on Unemployed Youth
The CJI said that there were enough ‘parasites’ in society who attack the system referring to the unemployed youth of the country.
"There are already parasites of society who attack the system and you want to join hands with them? There are youngsters like cockroaches, who don't get any employment and don't have any place in profession. Some of them become media, some of them become social media, some of them become RTI activists, some of them become other activists, and they start attacking everyone...and you people file contempt petitions!" the CJI said.
Questions on Petitioner’s Conduct
The CJI also questioned the petitioners conduct saying that the senior advocate designation is not something to be pursued rather it is conferred.
“You are pursuing it. Does it look proper?” the bench said, asking whether the designation had become a status symbol to keep “ornamentally”.
“Is this the conduct of a person who seeks to be designated as a senior advocate?” the bench asked.
Published At: