<p>New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has asked the Bar Council of India and Bar Council of Delhi to respond to a plea by an advocate for ensuring security and safety of the lawyers practicing in the courts of the national capital.</p><p>A bench of Justice of Swarana Kanta Sharma issued notice to the regulatory bodies and appointed senior advocate Kirti Uppal to assist the court on the issue in question.</p><p>The court fixed the petition filed by advocate Lakshya Yadav for consideration on March 22, 2024.</p><p>The petitioner-advocate contended that on December 4, 2023, he appeared before Family Court-02, South East Saket, Delhi accompanied by his junior, Rohit Sherawat, and his client Vikrant for the purpose to attend the proceedings in the matter titled “Radhika & Anr Vs Vikrant”. </p><p>He claimed that during the course of the proceedings, Radhika and her mother Rashmi Devi began threatening him with dire consequences and abused both the petitioner and his client. </p><p>"After the hearing, upon leaving the Court, the petitioner was attacked by Radhika and her mother with shoes and slippers at the gate of Family Court," he alleged. </p>.Supreme Court notice to Uttar Pradesh Bar Council on plea challenging high enrolment fee.<p>The petitioner filed his complaint/representations before the concerned authorities and lodged an FIR against the two women and two other unknown persons. However, there is no grievance redressal mechanism to ensure the safety, security, and dignity of the advocates practising within the territorial jurisdiction of Delhi, his plea claimed.</p><p>The plea sought a direction to make reference for the initiation of criminal contempt proceedings against Radhika and her mother Rashmi Devi on the bases of report submitted by the inquiry committee, if they are found guilty of misconduct and misbehaviour.</p><p>The petitioner sought a direction from the statutory bodies like the Bar Council of India and the Bar Council of Delhi to formulate rules, regulations, and policy for the purpose of ensuring safety, security and protection of the advocates within and outside court premises, from the misbehaviour, threat and misconduct by the litigants and other associated people, in consultation with Delhi Police.</p>
<p>New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has asked the Bar Council of India and Bar Council of Delhi to respond to a plea by an advocate for ensuring security and safety of the lawyers practicing in the courts of the national capital.</p><p>A bench of Justice of Swarana Kanta Sharma issued notice to the regulatory bodies and appointed senior advocate Kirti Uppal to assist the court on the issue in question.</p><p>The court fixed the petition filed by advocate Lakshya Yadav for consideration on March 22, 2024.</p><p>The petitioner-advocate contended that on December 4, 2023, he appeared before Family Court-02, South East Saket, Delhi accompanied by his junior, Rohit Sherawat, and his client Vikrant for the purpose to attend the proceedings in the matter titled “Radhika & Anr Vs Vikrant”. </p><p>He claimed that during the course of the proceedings, Radhika and her mother Rashmi Devi began threatening him with dire consequences and abused both the petitioner and his client. </p><p>"After the hearing, upon leaving the Court, the petitioner was attacked by Radhika and her mother with shoes and slippers at the gate of Family Court," he alleged. </p>.Supreme Court notice to Uttar Pradesh Bar Council on plea challenging high enrolment fee.<p>The petitioner filed his complaint/representations before the concerned authorities and lodged an FIR against the two women and two other unknown persons. However, there is no grievance redressal mechanism to ensure the safety, security, and dignity of the advocates practising within the territorial jurisdiction of Delhi, his plea claimed.</p><p>The plea sought a direction to make reference for the initiation of criminal contempt proceedings against Radhika and her mother Rashmi Devi on the bases of report submitted by the inquiry committee, if they are found guilty of misconduct and misbehaviour.</p><p>The petitioner sought a direction from the statutory bodies like the Bar Council of India and the Bar Council of Delhi to formulate rules, regulations, and policy for the purpose of ensuring safety, security and protection of the advocates within and outside court premises, from the misbehaviour, threat and misconduct by the litigants and other associated people, in consultation with Delhi Police.</p>
