Get the latest news on Business, Startups, Auto, Tech, Stock Market, Finance, Careers, Education, Science, Mobile, Crypto, and Sustainability on Business Insider India.

Business News - read latest and trending business news and headlines

Expressing "serious concern" over pendency of a large number of cheque bounce cases, the Supreme Court has said courts should encourage compounding of offences under the Negotiable Instruments Act if parties are willing to reach a compromise. A bench of Justices Sudhanshu Dhulia and Ahsanuddin Amanullah set aside the conviction of a man named P Kumarasamy in a cheque bounce case, after noting that the parties have entered into a settlement agreement and Rs 5.25 lakh has been paid to the complainant. "A large number of cases involving dishonour of cheques are pending before courts which is a serious concern for our judicial system. Keeping in mind that the 'compensatory aspect' of remedy shall have priority over the 'punitive aspect', courts should encourage compounding of offences under the NI Act if parties are willing to do so," the bench said in its July 11 order. The Negotiable Instruments Act governs all negotiable instruments like promissory notes, bills of exchange, and cheques. Compoundable offences are those where a compromise can be reached by the rival parties. The bench said it has to be remembered that dishonour of cheques is a regulatory offence which was made an offence only in view of public interest so that the reliability of these instruments can be ensured. "Considering the totality of the circumstances and compromise between the parties, we allow this appeal and acquit the appellants by setting aside the impugned order dated April 1, 2019 as well the trial court's order dated October 16, 2012. Appellant no.2 (P Kumarasamy), who was exempted from surrendering by this Court, need not surrender and his sureties are hereby discharged," the bench ordered. The bench noted that in 2006, P Kumarasamy alias Ganesh had borrowed Rs 5,25,000 from respondent A Subramaniam but did not repay the loan. To discharge the debt, the bench said, Kumarasamy gave a cheque for Rs 5.25 lakh in the name of his partnership firm M/s New Win Export. "Since the cheque was dishonoured due to insufficient funds, respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 NI Act against the appellants where the trial court vide order dated October 16, 2012 convicted the appellants and imposed a sentence of one year of simple imprisonment each," it said. It noted Kumarasamy challenged the conviction before the appellate court, which reversed the findings of the trial court and acquitted him and the firm. "Finally, when the matter was taken to the high court at the instance of the respondent/complainant, the high court in its order dated April 1, 2019 set aside the order of the appellate court and restored the order of the trial court, convicting the appellants," the bench noted. It noted the firm and Kumarsamy challenged the high court order before the apex court. The bench added that Section 147 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 makes all offences under it compoundable. "In our opinion, this settlement agreement can be treated to be compounding of the offence. All the same, Section 320 (5) of CrPC provides that if compounding has to be done after conviction, then it can only be done with the leave of the court where appeal against such conviction is pending," it said. The bench said in cases where the accused relies upon some document for compounding the offence at the appellate stage, courts shall try to check the veracity of such documents. "For the same, in the present matter, this court vide order dated March 18, 2024 had asked the respondent-complainant to file an affidavit to bring on record whether or not any compromise has been reached between the parties," it said. The bench said an affidavit was filed by the complainant in compliance with the order where it was said that the accused have paid the amount to the satisfaction of the complainant, and that he has no objection if conviction of the appellants is set aside. "Now, when the accused and complainant have reached a settlement permissible by law and this court has also satisfied itself regarding the genuineness of the settlement, we think that the conviction of the appellants would not serve any purpose and thus, it is required to be set aside," it said.<meta content="cms.next" name="cmsei" />

Pendency of large number of cheque bounce cases a serious concern: SC

The Delhi High Court has refused to set aside the Central government's order blocking open-source messaging application 'Briar' in Jammu and Kashmir as it is suspected to be used by terrorists and could be a potential threat to national security. The high court observed that in the matters of national security, principles of natural justice can be given a go-by. "The interim order has been reviewed by the committee constituted under Section 7 of the Blocking Rules and as stated earlier, the committee consists of top officials of the Government of India. The blocking orders have been passed for 14 applications/ softwares, including the software/ application of the petitioner herein as it was being used by the terrorists and their supporters to disturb the security and sovereignty of the country. "The application of the petitioner has been blocked only in Jammu and Kashmir and the same can be used in all other parts of the country. In view of the above, this court is not inclined to entertain the present writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed," Justice Subramonium Prasad said. Sublime Software Ltd, the petitioner, sought direction to the Centre to produce and publish the order passed by it under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, blocking its open-source messaging application 'Briar' and also prayed for setting aside that order. It was stated that Briar operates on a technology in which a person can directly send a message to another person even when there is no internet connectivity. It added that the technology is crucial in times of emergency, natural calamities and catastrophic disasters in providing emergency healthcare and disaster management as it enables smooth communication between persons and authorities during times of distress. On the other hand, the Centre's counsel submitted that the software, which can work even when there is no internet connection, is suspected to be used by terrorists in Jammu and Kashmir. The application can be misused and can definitely be a potential threat to the national security, sovereignty and integrity of India, the Centre's counsel said. The high court in its order noted that rule 16 of the Blocking Rules provides that strict confidentiality shall be maintained regarding all the requests and complaints received and actions taken thereof. "This court can take judicial notice of the fact that decisions taken at the highest level and for the benefit of the security and sovereignty of the country can be kept confidential," it said.<meta content="cms.next" name="cmsei" />

HC dismisses plea to set aside order blocking messaging app in J&K over threat to national security

The Bar Council of India (BCI) has directed all State Bar Councils to take stringent disciplinary actions against advocates found advertising or seeking work through online portals, which is a direct violation of the Bar Council of India rules. The Bar Council of India has issued directives and cease and desist notices in compliance with a judgment pronounced on July 3, 2024 by the Madras High Court. The judgment underscores that the legal profession is a noble service to society and not a business driven by profit motives. In this regard, BCI directs the online platform to remove all listings, profiles, and advertisements related to legal practices by advocates immediately and no later than four weeks from the date of the notice. Cease and desist any operations enabling the advertisement or solicitation of legal practice by advocates. Submit a detailed compliance report outlining the actions taken to the BCI by August 10, 2024 Failure to comply with these directives will result in the BCI initiating legal proceedings and seeking appropriate penalties against the non-compliant organizations, stated BCI. All portals, online platforms, and advocates found in violation of Rule-36 of the Bar Council of India Rules are hereby issued a public notice to ensure strict compliance with these Rules immediately. Any advertisements contravening the aforementioned Rule must be withdrawn forthwith, stated BCI. Practices of online platforms offering lawyer services were examined and found to be in violation of the BCI Rules. The permissibility of lawyers advertising and soliciting work was scrutinized and deemed inappropriate. The involvement of online intermediaries in facilitating lawyer services was assessed and found to be in breach of professional conduct standards. The court ruled that online platforms cannot seek protection under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act for activities illegal under the Advocates Act and BCI Rules, added Bar Council of India's statement. Recently Madras High Court directed BCI to issue Circulars/Instructions/Guidelines to the State Bar Councils to initiate disciplinary proceedings for misconduct against the Advocate's advertising, soliciting works directly or indirectly, whether by circulars, advertisements, touts, personal communication, interviews not warranted by personal relations, furnishing or inspiring newspaper comments or producing his photographs to be published in connection with the case where he is engaged or concerned. <meta content="cms.next" name="cmsei" />

BCI directs State Bar Councils to take action against lawyers advertising, seeking work through online portals

Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud on Saturday observed that it is "grave danger" to describe the court as a "temple of justice and equate judges with Gods" as the task of judges is to serve the public interest. Addressing a conference on Contemporary Judicial Developments in Kolkata CJI Chandrachud said that "constitutional morality" reflects an institution's commitment of the Court system. "Too very often, when we are addressed as Honour or as Lordship or as Ladyship. There is a very grave danger when people say that the court is a temple of justice. There is a grave danger that we perceive ourselves as the deities in those temples," Chandrachud said. The CJI said that "he feels reticent when he is told that the court is the temple of justice because the temple postulates that the judges are in the position of a deity." "I would rather recast the role of the judge as a server of the people. And when you regard yourselves as people who are there to serve others, then you bring in the notion of compassion, of empathy, of judging but not being judgmental about others," the CJI said. He further emphasized on the word 'contemporary' and said that the word itself speaks about in the context of contemporary societal challenges which the judges face in the work they do. "This conference speaks on Contemporary Judicial Developments and strengthening justice through law and technology. The word 'contemporary' is very important because it does not speak about the work which we do in the abstract, but in the context of contemporary societal challenges which we as judges face in the work we do. We, therefore, look at the law and its intersection of technology from the perspective of the societal conditions in which those whom we serve exist in our societies because the true merit of our work lies in addressing challenges faced by those at whose feet we are intended to serve the common citizens of India," he said. He further said that the people exist in a federal structure that is marked by a great deal of diversity. "I was born in Mumbai, belong to a small village located 60-70 kilometers away from Pune. The work as judges we do in Delhi is to realize the importance of preserving the diversity of India. So how do we then dwell on the constitutional of morality? At one level constitutional morality is founded in the permeable values. The values which the Constitution, Preamble sets out," he added. The CJI said that C onstitutional morality addresses itself in every component of society. "The Consitution is not merely a dialogue between the states and its citizens, or Union or the states, or States and States. It is a dialogue within and between the societies. The Consitution Morality itself addresses to every component of society," he said. He said that even while sentencing anyone in a criminal case, the judges do that with a sense of compassion, since at the end, a human being is being sentenced. "So these concepts of constitutional morality, which I think, are the key, not just for the judges of the Supreme Court or the High Court but also for the district judiciary itself, because the engagement of the common citizens begins first and foremost with the district judiciary," CJI Chandrachud said. He further stressed on the relevance of technology in the functioning of the judiciary and said that the language is the central barrier to accessing and understanding verdicts by common people. "Technology can provide us with some answers. Most judgments are written in English. Technology has enabled us to translate them. We are translating 51,000 judgments in other languages," CJI said. <meta content="cms.next" name="cmsei" />

"Grave danger": CJI Chandrachud on equating court with temple, judge with God

The Supreme Court, on Tuesday, granted one-week time to yoga guru Ramdev, his aide Balkrishna and Patanjali Ayurved to issue a public apology in the misleading advertisements case, but said it was not letting them "off the hook" now. Both Ramdev and Balkrishna were present during the hearing and personally tendered an unqualified apology to the apex court. A bench of Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah took note of their apologies, but made it clear that at this stage it has not decided to "let them off the hook". "You are doing good work but you can't degrade allopathy," the bench told Balkrishna while interacting with him. Ramdev, who also interacted with the bench, said he had no intention to show disrespect to the court in any manner. However, the bench told Balkrishna that they (Patanjali) are not so innocent that they didn't know what the top court had said in its earlier orders in the case. "I am willing to give a public apology," senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Ramdev and Balkrishna, told the bench at the outset. The apex court asked Ramdev and Balkrishna, both of whom were present in the court, to come forward for an interaction with the bench. "They should feel they have a connect with the court," the bench said. The apex court has now posted the matter for further hearing on April 23. Ramdev and Balkrishna had last week tendered an "unconditional and unqualified apology" before the top court over advertisements issued by the firm making tall claims about the medicinal efficacy of its products. In two separate affidavits filed in the court, Ramdev and Balkrishna have tendered an unqualified apology for the "breach of the statement" recorded in the November 21 last year order of the apex court. In the November 21, 2023 order, the top court had noted that counsel representing Patanjali Ayurved had assured it that "henceforth there shall not be any violation of any law(s), especially relating to advertising or branding of products manufactured and marketed by it and, further, that no casual statements claiming medicinal efficacy or against any system of medicine will be released to the media in any form". The top court had said Patanjali Ayurved Ltd is "bound down to such assurance". The non-observance of the specific assurance and the subsequent media statements irked the apex court, which later issued a notice to them to explain why contempt proceedings be not initiated against them.<meta content="cms.next" name="cmsei" />

Patanjali ads case: Supreme Court asks Ramdev, Balkrishna to issue public apology; says not letting them off hook yet

Tuesday, April 2: Exaggerated claims of unbelievable results with the use of consumer products are not new in the Indian advertisement industry. But, the law of the land does explicitly prohibit and punish misleading advertisements from time to time. One such case is grabbing headlines of late. Baba Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna, co-founder and managing director of Patanjali, respectively, appeared before the Supreme Court today for a hearing regarding a case involving misleading advertisements. So, what exactly happened? <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="A case of false and misleading advertisements" comment="subhead" text="A case of false and misleading advertisements">A case of false and misleading advertisements</cmsannotation> The case began in November last year when the Supreme Court, responding to a petition by the Indian Medical Association (IMA), cautioned Patanjali Ayurved against airing "false" and "misleading" claims in its advertisements about medicinal products. The IMA cited several ads that allegedly portrayed allopathic medicine and doctors negatively, claiming that companies producing ayurvedic medicines made disparaging remarks to deceive the public. Despite the Supreme Court's cautionary stance and prohibition on advertising products claiming to treat specific ailments under the Drugs and Magic Remedies (Objectionable Advertisements) Act, 1954, Ramdev and Balkrishna reportedly conducted a press conference, once again making misleading claims about Patanjali's ability to cure various conditions permanently. Subsequently, on February 27, the Supreme Court expressed dissatisfaction with Patanjali's continuous dissemination of false advertisements regarding medicinal cures and issued notices to the company, questioning why contempt proceedings should not be initiated. It also chastised the government for not taking action and “sitting with their eyes shut”. On March 21, the Court summoned Baba Ramdev and Balkrishna to personally appear before it on April 2 to address their failure to respond to the contempt notice regarding misleading advertisements about medicinal cures. <cmsannotation type="cmsannotation" annotationid="What’s the latest update?" comment="subhead" text="What’s the latest update?">What’s the latest update?</cmsannotation> In today's hearing, the Supreme Court criticised Ramdev and Balkrishna for their "absolute defiance" in failing to submit proper affidavits of compliance and for disregarding legal directives. The Court also rebuked Patanjali's MD for describing the Drugs and Cosmetics (Magic Remedies) Act as "archaic". Noting that Patanjali's advertisements are in the "teeth of law" of the land, the Court warned Ramdev to prepare for potential consequences. Justices Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, presiding over the bench, declined to acknowledge the apology extended by Patanjali last month. Subsequently, Ramdev's attorney, reportedly with folded hands, reiterated that both Ramdev and Balakrishna were extending a personal and unconditional apology before the court. Finally, the Court has granted Ramdev and Balkrishna a final opportunity to file affidavits in one week and mandated their presence at the next hearing on April 10. <meta content="cms.next" name="cmsei" />

Government ‘sitting with its eyes shut’, says Supreme Court as Patanjali’s misleading advertisement case drags on

<ul><li>In order to meet the objectives, the Bar Council of India Rules for registration of foreign lawyers and foreign Law Firms in India has been framed.</li><li>The Bar Council of India stated that the standards of Indian lawyers in proficiency in law are comparable with international standards.</li><li>Hence, the legal fraternity in India is not likely to suffer any disadvantage in case law practice in India is opened up to foreign lawyers.</li></ul> The Bar Council of India(BCI) has allowed foreign lawyers and law firms to practice foreign law and diverse international law and international arbitration matters in India. The council said, "Taking an all-inclusive view, the Bar Council of India resolves to implement rules enabling the foreign lawyers and Foreign Law Firms to practice foreign law and diverse international law and international arbitration matters in India on the principle of reciprocity in a well defined, regulated and controlled manner." In order to meet the objectives, the Bar Council of India has framed the Bar Council of India Rules for registration of foreign lawyers and foreign Law Firms in India, 2021 under its rule-making powers under clauses (d), (e), (ic), (1) and (m) of sub-section (1) of section 7 and clauses (ah), (ag), (c), (e) and (h) of sub-section (1) of section 49 read with sections 24, 29 and 47 of the Advocates Act, 1961 and under all other enabling provisions. Bar Council of India is of the view that opening up a law practice in India to foreign lawyers in the field of practice of foreign law; diverse international legal issues in non-litigious matters and in international arbitration cases would go a long way in helping the legal profession/ domain grow in India to the benefit of lawyers in India too, the council said. Bar Council of India stated that the standards of Indian lawyers in proficiency in law are comparable with the international standards and the legal fraternity in India is not likely to suffer any disadvantage in case law practice in India is opened up to foreign lawyers in a restricted and well-controlled and regulated manner on the principle of reciprocity as it would be mutually beneficial for lawyers from India and abroad and these Rules are an attempt by the Bar Council of India in this direction. These rules will also help to address the concerns expressed about the flow of Foreign Direct Investment in the country and making India a hub of International Commercial Arbitration. In case, we sleep over the matter, the legal fraternity of India may be left behind in providing legal/professional expertise in accordance with the rule of law in a manner consistent with the best interests of this fast-growing class of clients in India, it said. Let us ensure that an opportunity for creating development and growth for the legal profession and in the legal sphere in India is not lost, stated BCI. Many countries have already allowed foreign lawyers to practice foreign law and diverse international legal issues and arbitration matters in their countries in restricted fields with specific and prescribed conditions, BCI notification said. Further, the notification stated, "It is also to be noted that the Bar Council of India is keen to progress on the idea of an MoU between the Bar Council of India, the Government of India (through Ministry of Law and Justice ) on one part and the Law Society of England and Wales, Government of U.K., Bar Council of England and Wales, on the other." "The U.K. Delegates have also assured the Bar Council of India that the Authorities in the U.K. are also keen and interested in the means of collaboration, cooperation and joint practice between Indian advocates and UK lawyers," added the notification. Moreover, having regard to the aim and object of the International Commercial Arbitration introduced in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, foreign lawyers cannot be debarred to come to India and conduct arbitration proceedings in respect of disputes arising out of a contract relating to international commercial arbitration, stated BCI. The opinion of the Bar Council of India the legal profession in India has to rise to the occasion to meet the global changes in the Legal Arena caused by the migration of people from one country to another on such a large scale that had not been witnessed in earlier days. The world is becoming a global village. International trade and commerce are advancing at a great pace. The demand for an open, responsive and receptive legal professional dispensation mechanism in India from clients/public who operate in international and cross-country business is becoming severe day by day. Growth in the international legal work sphere and globalization of legal practice and internationalization of the law is increasingly becoming relevant to the growth of the legal profession and practices in India. On this development, Rajesh Narain Gupta, Managing Partner of SNG and Partners, said "Entry of foreign law firms will change the landscape for law firms in India. This would overall support in a big way the ambition of India to be more visible and valuable in a global context, especially in international trade and commerce." "This will be a game changer for mid-size firms and will also help the law firm in India to achieve more efficiency in talent management, International Arbitration technology, domain knowledge in a global context, and management," Gupta added. SEE ALSO: <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/news/garment-producers-demand-200-crore-dues-from-kishore-biyanis-future-group/articleshow/98658896.cms">Garment producers demand ₹200 crore dues from Kishore Biyani's Future Group</a> <a target="_blank" class="c-link c-message_attachment__title_link" href="https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/delhi-govt-extends-ongoing-excise-policy-by-6-months/articleshow/98658915.cms">Delhi govt extends ongoing excise policy by 6 months</a> <meta content="cms.next" name="cmsei" />

Top Stories

Pendency of large number of cheque bounce cases a serious concern: SC

HC dismisses plea to set aside order blocking messaging app …

BCI directs State Bar Councils to take action against lawyer…

Latest Stories

"Grave danger": CJI Chandrachud on equating court with temple, judge with God

Patanjali ads case: Supreme Court asks Ramdev, Balkrishna to issue public apology; says not letting them off hook yet

Government ‘sitting with its eyes shut’, says Supreme Court as Patanjali’s misleading advertisement case drags on

Kunal Kambli

Bar Council allows foreign law firms, lawyers to practice in India