Child protection is a vital concern in any society. The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act is a crucial piece of legislation in India that aims to safeguard children from sexual abuse and exploitation. This comprehensive guide aims to explain the provisions of the POCSO Act, its significance, notable cases, and legal frameworks related to child protection.The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012  in India is a comprehensive law designed to protect children from sexual abuse, exploitation, and harassment. It defines various sexual offences, provides child-friendly procedures for reporting and investigation, and ensures strict punishment for offenders. Background of the POCSO Act The POCSO Act was enacted in 2012 to provide a robust legal framework for the protection of minors. It recognizes their vulnerability and lays down specific guidelines to prevent sexual offenses against them. The Act applies to all individuals under the age of 18, imposing severe penalties for various forms of sexual exploitation. For example, offenders can face imprisonment for a minimum of three years for sexual assault, with the possibility of up to five years for aggravated assault. The goal of the legislation is not only to protect children but also to ensure they receive necessary support, including medical care and psychological counseling, after experiencing abuse. This reflects a comprehensive approach necessary to address the trauma inflicted upon victims. Key Provisions of the POCSO Act Definition of Offenses The POCSO Act includes several offenses categorized under different sections: Sexual Assault (Section 3) : This refers to any act involving a child that falls under sexual acts without the child’s consent. Sexual Harassment (Section 11) : This includes any act that may be regarded as harassment, such as unwanted physical contact or advances targeting a child. Use of a Child for Pornographic Purposes (Section 13) : This encompasses any depiction of a child engaging in sexual activities or subjects, with severe penalties. Reporting Obligations A unique aspect of the POCSO Act is the mandatory reporting requirement. Anyone aware of a child being subjected to sexual offenses must report the matter to authorities. This provision encourages community involvement in protecting vulnerable children. In a survey, it was found that areas where reporting was enforced effectively saw a 40% increase in reported cases, indicating greater community engagement. Special Courts The Act requires the establishment of special courts to ensure quick trials for offenses against children. The judicial process aims to minimize the time a child must wait for justice, thus reducing further trauma. Statistics show that special courts have managed to reduce trial durations by approximately 50%, setting a benchmark for timely justice. Provision of Support The POCSO Act ensures that child victims receive care and protection during investigations. This includes counseling services and medical assistance tailored to their needs. These measures help create a supportive environment, allowing children to recover and rebuild trust in their surroundings. Importance of the POCSO Act The POCSO Act is significant for multiple reasons: Legal Protection : It provides a clear legal framework defining sexual offenses against children while imposing strict penalties on offenders. Empowerment of Victims : By emphasizing the right to privacy and protection, it encourages child victims to come forward without the fear of stigma. Reports suggest that following the Act's implementation, there was a 30% increase in cases reported by victims. Enhanced Awareness : The Act has raised public awareness regarding child sexual abuse and the necessity for preventative measures, fostering a culture of vigilance. Notable Cases Under POCSO Act The effectiveness of the POCSO Act can be seen in notable cases that have arisen since its enactment. These cases have set important legal precedents: Case 1: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Rakesh In this case, a man was found guilty of sexually assaulting a minor. The special court sentenced him to 20 years of rigorous imprisonment. This swift trial and conviction emphasized the importance of expedited justice for child victims, illustrating the Act's impact in practice. Case 2: The Tiwari Case This case involved the use of a child for pornographic purposes. The accused was apprehended and faced stringent punishment under the POCSO Act. This case highlighted the significance of enforcing strict penalties on those exploiting children. The Procedure for Reporting a Case Step 1: Informing Authorities The first step in reporting an offense is to inform the police or the Child Welfare Committee (CWC). Authorities are mandated to respond to complaints quickly to ensure protection for the child. Step 2: Medical Examination After reporting, the child typically undergoes a medical examination conducted by trained professionals. This step is crucial for gathering evidence and ensuring the child’s immediate health and safety. Step 3: Investigation A thorough investigation is initiated by specialized officers sensitized to handle child abuse cases. This ensures that the child is treated with dignity and respect throughout the process. Step 4: Trial Once the investigation is complete, the case is presented in a designated special court that hears POCSO cases, ensuring that justice is delivered swiftly. Challenges in Implementing the POCSO Act Despite the POCSO Act's robust legal framework, challenges remain in effectively implementing its provisions: Awareness and Training There is often a lack of awareness regarding the Act among the public, law enforcement, and judiciary. This results in some crimes going unreported or being poorly handled. Research indicates that less than 50% of law enforcement officers received adequate training on the Act in some regions. Stigmatization Children who report sexual offenses frequently face social stigma, discouraging them from coming forward. Fostering an environment of support is crucial for empowering victims. Resource Limitations Many regions lack sufficient resources to implement the POCSO Act effectively, such as trained personnel and dedicated special courts. This limits the Act's overall impact on child protection. Support Mechanisms Under POCSO Psychological Counselors The Act provides for appointments of counselors to help child victims deal with trauma resulting from abuse. These services are essential for rehabilitation and recovery, playing a vital role in the child’s long-term healing process. Child-Friendly Reporting Mechanisms To make reporting less intimidating for children, the Act promotes creating child-friendly environments at police stations and courts. This encourages children to seek help in a comfortable setting. A Path Forward for Child Protection The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act is a landmark legislation designed to safeguard children's rights and ensure their protection from sexual abuse and exploitation. While the Act offers a comprehensive legal framework and imposes strict penalties for offenders, ongoing challenges require a united effort from the community, law enforcement, and the judiciary. Awareness and education about the nuances of the POCSO Act are vital for making sure children feel safe and empowered to report offenses. Creating a supportive environment, eradicating stigma, and ensuring efficient implementation will be essential for realizing the Act's goals. By building a society that prioritizes child safety, we can create a future where children thrive without fear or exploitation, growing into confident and secure individuals. Now, let's compare the child protection laws of India, the UK, and the USA in terms of history, legal provisions, and key differences. 1. India - POCSO Act, 2012 Historical Background: Before POCSO, child sexual offences were primarily covered under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), but they lacked specificity and a child-centric approach. The Act was enacted in 2012 to address loopholes and provide a dedicated legal framework. Key Provisions: Defines sexual offences against children, including penetrative and non-penetrative assault, sexual harassment, and pornography . Establishes mandatory reporting  of offences. Special courts  to handle POCSO cases. Presumption of guilt  (burden of proof on the accused in certain cases). Severe penalties , including life imprisonment and the death penalty for aggravated sexual assault. Key Differences from UK & USA Laws: Mandatory reporting  is stricter in India. No consent consideration  for children under 18 (even if consensual, it's considered abuse). Fast-track courts  are set up for quicker trials. Death penalty  (introduced in 2019) for certain severe offences. 2. United Kingdom - Child Protection Laws Historical Background: The UK has had laws protecting children since the Children Act of 1908 . Sexual Offences Act 2003  is the primary legislation dealing with sexual offences, including those against children. Key Provisions: Defines child sexual abuse , including grooming, exploitation, trafficking , etc. Age of consent is 16 , but sexual activity with a child under 13 is always illegal. Sex Offenders Register  to track offenders. Child Sexual Exploitation (CSE) laws  focus on grooming and online abuse. Key Differences from India & USA: Age of consent is lower (16 years)  than in India (18 years). Grooming laws  are stronger than in India. Sex offenders are tracked  through a register, which India does not have. No death penalty  for sexual offences. 3. United States - Child Protection Laws Historical Background: Child protection laws vary by state and federal levels . The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA), 1974 , was the first major federal law addressing child abuse. The Adam Walsh Child Protection Act, 2006 , created a National Sex Offender Registry . Key Provisions: Different age of consent  across states (ranges from 16 to 18 years ). Federal and state laws  work together, making enforcement complex. Megan’s Law  (1996) requires public access to sex offender registries. Harsh penalties , including life imprisonment  for severe offences. Strong internet safety laws  (like the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act - COPPA ). Key Differences from India & UK: Decentralized system  (laws vary by state). Public sex offender registries  exist, unlike in India and UK. Strict online safety laws  protect children from digital exploitation. Life imprisonment  is common, but no mandatory death penalty  like in India. Summary of Key Differences Feature India (POCSO Act) UK (Sexual Offences Act 2003) USA (CAPTA, Adam Walsh Act) Age of Consent 18 (strict) 16 16-18 (varies by state) Mandatory Reporting Yes No (but encouraged) Yes Death Penalty Yes (for severe offences) No No Sex Offender Registry No Yes (private) Yes (public) Grooming Laws Weak Strong Strong Online Protection Laws Limited Strong Very Strong Conclusion India’s POCSO Act is stricter  in terms of mandatory reporting, presumption of guilt, and the death penalty  for extreme cases. The UK and USA focus more on sex offender tracking and grooming prevention . The USA has the strongest online safety laws , while the UK has a well-regulated criminal justice approach . Each country has tailored its laws based on its social, legal, and cultural context  to protect children from sexual abuse and exploitation. Child protective services office focusing on educational resources for safeguarding children.

In our increasingly complex world, vehicle registration is more than just a piece of paperwork. It is a vital step towards improving road safety and reducing crime. Central to this effort is the High Security Registration Plate (HSRP), a system adopted by numerous countries to deter criminal activities and facilitate the tracking of vehicles. This article explores the regulations surrounding HSRPs globally, along with their benefits and drawbacks. Understanding High Security Registration Plates (HSRPs) High Security Registration Plates (HSRPs) are specially crafted number plates equipped with features that enhance their security. These plates often include components like microchips, holograms, and color codes that are challenging to replicate. Such enhancements enable law enforcement to identify vehicles quickly, which not only boosts public safety but also helps authorities in their work. Global Overview of HSRP Implementation India In India, HSRPs have been mandatory since 2019, following a directive from the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH). Each plate features a unique identification number, allowing easier tracking of vehicles and reducing theft. According to reports, states with HSRPs noted a 30% decrease in vehicle theft rates within the first year of implementation. However, challenges remain, particularly in public awareness and accessibility to authorized dealerships, which affects compliance. Regulation : Central Motor Vehicles Rules (CMVR), 1989 (Amendment in 2001 & 2019) Mandatory for : All vehicles, new and old Features : Aluminum plate with a unique hologram, laser-etched PIN, and tamper-proof locks Brazil Brazil has taken significant steps to improve vehicle identification with the Mercosur plate system, which requires HSRPs to have uniform designs, including QR codes and security holograms. This standardization across the country and neighboring states improves vehicle traceability and has led to a 25% reduction in cross-border vehicle theft. This unified approach simplifies law enforcement efforts across regional borders, making it difficult for criminals to forge plates. United States While the U.S. does not mandate HSRPs at the federal level, states like California and Texas are incorporating secure features in their registration processes. For example, California has introduced plates with QR codes and microchip technology. However, without a nationwide standard, vehicle identification can differ greatly from state to state, complicating enforcement. This patchwork system has prompted concerns regarding compliance, potentially hindering the effectiveness of HSRPs. Regulation : Varies by state; no federal HSRP law Mandatory for : Personal and commercial vehicles (state-specific) Features : Some states use RFID-enabled plates (e.g., California digital plates) Australia In Australia, states like New South Wales are discussing adopting HSRP-like features due to increasing vehicle thefts. Statistics indicate that regions implementing similar security measures have seen a 40% decline in car theft incidents. As these discussions proceed, the focus remains on enhancing public safety and reducing vehicle crime rates. Regulation : State-based regulations Mandatory for : Varies by state (e.g., Victoria mandates secure plates) Features : Anti-counterfeiting measures, smart plates in some areas Germany Regulation : Fahrzeug-Zulassungsverordnung (Vehicle Registration Ordinance) Mandatory for : All registered vehicles Features : UV-sensitive ink, watermarks, and security holograms United Kingdom Regulation : DVLA (Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency) rules Mandatory for : All vehicles Features : Tamper-proof material, special font, and anti-theft screws Canada Regulation : Provincial-level regulations (e.g., Ontario, British Columbia) Mandatory for : Varies by province Features : Digital plates, RFID tags in some provinces Comparison of HSRP Systems: India vs Other Countries Feature India (HSRP) US EU UK Canada Germany Australia Mandate National State-wise EU-wide UK-wide Province-wise National State-wise Material Aluminum Varies Aluminum/Plastic Acrylic Plastic/Aluminum Aluminum Aluminum Security Hologram, laser etching, PIN Some RFID-enabled Microdots, holograms Tamper-proof screws Digital & RFID tags in some provinces UV ink, watermarks Anti-counterfeiting RFID Tech Optional Yes (some states) No No Yes No No Tamper-proof Yes No Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Digital Plates No Yes (limited) No No Yes (some) No Yes (some states) Advantages of HSRPs Enhanced Security The most significant benefit of HSRPs lies in their security features, which dramatically reduce tampering and counterfeiting. With elements like microchips and holograms, these plates provide a straightforward way for authorities to verify authenticity. For instance, a comprehensive study found that regions implementing HSRPs saw a 50% increase in successful vehicle recoveries post-theft. Improved Vehicle Recovery HSRPs improve the chances of recovering stolen vehicles. Unique identifiers and tracking capabilities enable law enforcement to find stolen vehicles swiftly. This not only deters criminals but also gives vehicle owners peace of mind, knowing their possessions are better protected. Standardization and Compliance Another advantage is the standardization of plates, which simplifies processes for manufacturers and vehicle owners. By having a uniform set of specifications, administrative work within transportation departments becomes more efficient, reducing delays in vehicle registration. Advantages of HSRP Prevents Vehicle Theft  – Difficult to remove or duplicate, reducing vehicle theft. Tamper-Proof  – Snap-lock technology ensures plates cannot be removed easily. Enhances Law Enforcement  – Easier tracking of stolen or illegal vehicles. Standardization  – Uniform appearance improves vehicle identification. Aids Digital Tracking  – Future implementation of RFID-based toll and security systems. Disadvantages of HSRPs High Implementation Costs One major drawback relates to the implementation costs that HSRPs entail for both governments and consumers. For instance, setting up the necessary technology and training staff for enforcement requires substantial financial investment. As a result, consumers may face heightened registration fees, which can be a significant burden, especially in developing nations. Resistance to Change There can be hesitance in adjusting to HSRP regulations. Public understanding of these plates' benefits differs from region to region, leading to skepticism among vehicle owners. Insufficient public education about HSRPs can result in confusion and resistance to compliance. Fraudulent Activities Despite their security features, HSRPs are not entirely foolproof. Criminals may still find ways to exploit weaknesses, leading to fraudulent activities. Additionally, advancements in technology may outpace current security measures, creating vulnerabilities over time. Disadvantages of HSRP Cost Burden  – Additional cost for vehicle owners, especially for retrofitting older vehicles. Implementation Challenges  – Delays and backlogs in issuance due to high demand. RFID Issues  – Not all countries use RFID-enabled plates, limiting effectiveness. Corruption & Fraud  – Some vendors charge extra or engage in fraudulent activities. Weather Damage  – In certain climates, the quality of the plates may deteriorate over time. A Comparative Analysis of Global Regulations Enforcement and Compliance The enforcement of HSRPs varies widely. India has stringent rules, while the U.S. lacks a cohesive framework, leaving states to dictate their compliance. This difference can reduce the overall effectiveness of HSRPs in enhancing vehicle safety. Public Awareness and Perception Public perception of HSRPs varies dramatically. In countries like Brazil and India, where vehicle theft is common, residents support these measures. In contrast, in regions with fewer vehicle crime issues, such as segments of the U.S., public interest may dwindle, limiting compliance. Impact on Crime Rates Countries that have integrated HSRPs often report declines in vehicle-related crimes. For instance, Brazil has seen a measurable drop in vehicle theft since introducing HSRPs, which encourages other countries to consider similar initiatives as effective solutions for improving safety. Future Trends in HSRPs As technology develops, the future of High Security Registration Plates will likely see revolutionary improvements. For example, the integration of blockchain technology has the potential to significantly heighten security and further minimize the risk of counterfeiting. Additionally, the development of smart plates that can interface with law enforcement databases may become a reality, providing real-time security enhancements. Final Thoughts HSRP is an effective security measure adopted in India and similar systems exist globally with regional variations. While it offers significant advantages in reducing fraud and theft, the challenges in implementation and cost remain. As technology advances, more countries are moving towards digital and smart plates with RFID and GPS tracking for enhanced security. High Security Registration Plates provide considerable advantages alongside some challenges. Their security measures significantly reduce vehicle theft risk, while implementation costs and public resistance can pose obstacles. As countries navigate their unique regulations, the insights gathered from global perspectives on HSRPs offer important lessons about enhancing vehicle safety and streamlining administrative processes. Future technological advancements could unlock even more potential in making our roads safer for everyone. This image shows a close-up of a High Security Registration Plate with holographic features. As the conversation around HSRPs progresses, it is vital for policymakers, law enforcement, and the public to work together, fostering understanding and enhancing road safety through effective vehicle registration systems.

The legal systems of India and Nepal, two countries with shared borders and rich histories, have developed in unique ways influenced by their cultures and political backgrounds. Although these nations share similarities, their criminal laws reflect their distinct historical paths and societal values. In this post, we will take a closer look at the historical and modern differences in criminal law between India and Nepal. By examining how each legal system evolved, the core principles they uphold, and key differences in their laws, we aim to provide a clear picture of these two legal landscapes. Historical Context of Criminal Law in India India’s criminal law largely results from its colonial history. The Indian Penal Code (IPC), established in 1860 during British rule, is the primary legal framework governing crimes in India. The IPC aimed to establish a consistent law applicable across India’s varied regions. The introduction of the IPC transformed Indian legal history. It brought severe penalties and defined crimes in ways that were absent in traditional Indian laws. For instance, the IPC provides for capital punishment in crimes like murder, reflecting the harshness of colonial governance. The Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), enacted in 1973, outlines how criminal cases are addressed, clarifying procedures for arrests, trials, and appeals. Since gaining independence in 1947, India has worked to revise its legal principles. Various amendments have been introduced to ensure that the laws reflect contemporary societal values. For example, the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act of 2013 introduced stricter punishments for sexual offenses after the Nirbhaya case, showcasing a response to public demands for justice. Historical Context of Criminal Law in Nepal Nepal’s legal framework has undergone significant changes rooted in ancient codes and customs. Historically, Nepal utilized customary laws and the Muluki Ain of 1961, which enforced caste norms and distinctions in legal processes. The establishment of constitutional democracy in the 1990s marked a turning point for Nepal’s legal landscape. The Constitution of Nepal 2015 strengthened the rule of law and emphasized fundamental rights, advocating for an independent judiciary and enhanced human rights protections. For instance, this Constitution mandates the protection of marginalized groups, aiming to create a more equitable legal environment. This evolution stands in stark contrast to India's colonial legal framework, highlighting Nepal's commitment to inclusivity and rights protection. Fundamental Principles of Indian Criminal Law Indian criminal law operates under several key principles that are vital to its operation. Presumption of Innocence At the core of Indian law is the principle of "presumption of innocence." This means that individuals are considered innocent until proven guilty. The burden of proof is placed on the prosecution, which is crucial for ensuring a fair trial. According to a 2022 report from the National Crime Records Bureau, around 74% of cases result in acquittals, emphasizing the importance of this principle in practice. Right to Legal Representation Every individual in India has the constitutional right to legal representation. Legal aid is available for those unable to afford an attorney, which enhances access to justice. As per the Legal Services Authorities Act, approximately 1.23 million people received legal aid in 2021, reflecting the government's commitment to support vulnerable populations. Sentencing Guidelines India’s criminal laws provide specific sentencing guidelines based on the nature of the crime. For instance, the IPC categorizes crimes into bailable and non-bailable offenses. Non-bailable offenses, like murder, carry severe penalties, including life imprisonment. Fundamental Principles of Nepali Criminal Law Similarly, Nepali criminal law emphasizes principles vital to its unique context. Gender Equality in Criminal Cases Nepal takes a progressive stance on gender equality in its legal system. Laws addressing domestic violence, such as the Domestic Violence (Crime and Punishment) Act, 2009, ensure better protection for women and marginalized groups. These laws have been crucial in reducing reported cases of violence; a 2021 study indicated a 30% decline in such incidents. Human Rights Consideration The Constitution emphasizes human rights, which protect individuals against unlawful detention and treatment. These frameworks are embedded in the criminal process, ensuring law enforcement respects citizens' rights. In 2022, the Nepal Police reported a 25% decrease in arbitrary arrests, showcasing compliance with human rights regulations. Focus on Rehabilitation Nepali criminal law emphasizes rehabilitation rather than solely punitive measures. Offenders, particularly first-time drug offenders, may be directed towards community service or rehabilitation programs. This approach reflects a societal goal of reintegrating individuals, as seen in the growing number of rehabilitation centers, which increased by 40% in the last decade. Comparative Differences in Criminal Procedure The procedural laws of India and Nepal reveal several key differences: Investigation and Arrest Procedures In India, police can investigate and arrest without a warrant under certain conditions, leading to concerns about misuse of power. In contrast, Nepal imposes stricter requirements for warrants, highlighting a commitment to protecting individual liberties. Trial Process Indian criminal trials can become lengthy, often slowed down by high case backlogs. The average trial can take several years to conclude, contributing to public frustration. On the other hand, Nepali courts are making strides towards faster resolutions, with a reported 20% improvement in processing times since 2018. Appeals Process The appeals process also varies. The Supreme Court of India serves as the highest authority for appeals. Conversely, while the Supreme Court of Nepal has similar functions, it often addresses broader constitutional issues, reflecting its unique focus on human rights. Contemporary Applications of Criminal Law Both India and Nepal are adapting their legal frameworks to contemporary challenges. Cyber Crimes Both nations face growing threats related to cyber crimes due to advancements in technology. India enacted the Information Technology Act, 2000, which addresses online safety and data protection. Reports indicate that cybercrime cases increased by 60% in just two years, showcasing the law's relevance. Nepal is currently developing laws to address similar issues but is still in early stages. As digital usage rises, establishing comprehensive cyber laws will become a pressing necessity. Drug-Related Offenses The handling of drug offenses also differs markedly. India has strict penalties outlined in the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, with severe sentences often leading to incarceration. In contrast, Nepal focuses on rehabilitation for first-time offenders, showing a balance between law enforcement and social support. Statistics show that over 50% of first-time offenders are diverted to rehabilitation programs rather than prison. Societal Influence on Legal Evolution Changes in public sentiment have significantly influenced legal adaptation in both countries. Public Sentiment and Legislative Change in India Public outrage over crimes against women has spurred major legal reforms in India. Following the Nirbhaya incident in 2012, the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 was introduced, which increased penalties for sexual assault and harassment, illustrating the impact of societal pressure on legislative change. Legislative Responses in Nepal In Nepal, rising discussions about caste discrimination and gender-based violence have prompted legislative reforms aimed at addressing these critical societal issues. The recent Women, Children, and Senior Citizens Act of 2019 reflects these changes by reinforcing protections for vulnerable populations. Cultural Nuances Affecting Legal Frameworks The traditional cultural landscapes of India and Nepal deeply influence their legal systems. India’s Complex Cultural Landscape India’s complex blend of cultures and religions leads to a diverse legal system. Personal laws, which vary by religion, can create conflicts between statutory provisions and traditional practices. This complexity often complicates legal proceedings and interpretations. Nepal’s Homogeneity and Diversity Nepal, predominantly Hindu, benefits from a more uniform legal structure due to its political history. While there is some ethnic diversity, the legal system generally reflects a cohesive set of laws. However, customary laws still influence local practices, occasionally clashing with statutory norms. Reflection on Legal Distinctions The differences between the criminal laws of India and Nepal highlight the profound influence of historical context and cultural understanding on legal practices. These distinctions are crucial in understanding how each country's legal system evolves in response to societal needs. Recognizing these differences fosters a deeper appreciation for how laws are shaped by their histories and the challenges they face. As the world changes, ongoing dialogue about criminal law will remain essential for both nations’ futures. Kathmandu Durbar Square – A testament to Nepal’s rich cultural heritage and evolving legal framework. In summary, understanding the intricate legal distinctions between Indian and Nepali criminal laws reveals the significance of history and culture in shaping legal practices. Exploring these differences enriches discussions about law and its adaptation to changing societal needs.

Reading bare act is very essential to understand laws; it is the exact text of a particular enactment by legislature. ... In this article, we will learn how to read Bare Act to understand laws. There are some methods or techniques, which you can follow while reading Bare Acts for a clear understanding of the law. Bare Acts - Live Reading Bare Act is very essential to understand laws; it is the exact text of a particular enactment by legislature. ... In this article, we will learn how to read Bare Act to understand laws. There are some methods or techniques, which you can follow while reading Bare Acts for a clear understanding of the law. www.lawtool.net THE PETROLEUM ACT, 1934 (Act No. 30 of 1934) THE PETROLEUM ACT, 1934 (Act No. 30 of 1934) An Act to consolidate and amend the law) relating to the import, transport, storage, production, refining and blending of petroleum [16th September, 1934] Whereas it is expedient to consolidate and amend the law relating to import, transport, storage, production, refining and blending of petroleum. It is hereby enacted as follows: Click Here THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 (Act No. 5 of 1908) An Act to consolidate and amend the laws relating to the procedure of the Courts of Civil Judicature. WHEREAS it is expedient to consolidate and amend the laws relating to the procedure of the Courts of Civil Judicature; it is hereby enacted as follows:- Click Here CONSTITUTION OF INDIA CONSTITUTION OF INDIA WE, THE PEOPLE OF INDIA, having solemnly resolved to constitute India into a [SOVEREIGN, SOCIALIST, SECULAR, DEMOCRATIC, REPUBLIC] and to secure to all its citizens: JUSTICE, social, economic and political; LIBERTY of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship; EQUALITY of status and of opportunity; and to promote among them all; FRATERNITY assuring the dignity of the individual and the [unity and integrity of the Nation]; IN OUR CONSTITUENT ASSEMBLY this twenty-sixth day of November, 1949, do HEREBY ADOPT, ENACT AND GIVE TO OURSELVES THIS CONSTITUTION. 1. Substituted. by the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976, section. 2, for SOVEREIGN DEMOCRATIC REPUBLICw.e.f. 3-1-1977. 2. Substituted. by the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976, section. 2, for unity of the Nation w.e.f. 3-1-1977. Click Here Criminal and Motor Accident Laws Indian Penal Code, 1860 Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 Motor Vehicles (AMENDMENT) Act 2000 Personal Injuries (Emergency Provisions) Act, 1962 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Prevention of Terrorism Act 2002 The Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1938 The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1961 The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1993 The Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1990 The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 The Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 The Juvenile Justice Act, 1986 The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 The Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 The Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976 The Terrorist Affected Areas (Special Courts) Act 1984 The Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act 2004 The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Amendment Act 2008 The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967 The Prisoners (Attendance in Courts) Act, 1955 The Prevention of Seditious Meetings Act, 1911 The Prisoners Act, 1900 The Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978 Defence Law Air Force Act, 1950 The Army Act, 1950 The Reserve and Auxiliary Air Forces Act, 1952 The Armed Forces Tribunal Act 2007 The Navy Act, 1957 Air Crafts Act, 1934 The Airports Authority Of India Act, 1994 Corporate Law The Companies Act 2013 Companies (Foreign Interests) Act, 1918 Company Law Board Regulations, 1991 THE Companies (Amendment) Act, 2006 The Company Act, 1956 (Repealed) The Company Secretaries Act, 1980 The Companies (Donations To National Funds) Act, 1951 The Hire-Purchase Act, 1972 Indian Contract Act, 1872 The Partnership Act, 1932 The Sale of Goods Act, 1930 Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is a procedural law Property Law The Benami Transactions(Prohibitions) Act, 1988 Land Acquisition Act, 1894 Transfer of Property Act 1882 Miscellaneous Laws Constitution of India Citizenship Act, 1955 The Indian Evidence Act, 1872 The Arms Act, 1959 The Limitation Act, 1963 The Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 The Specific Relief Act, 1963 Family Law Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005. The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 The Family Courts Act,1984 The Foreign Marriage Act, 1969 The Guardians And Wards Act, 1890 The Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 The Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 The Indian Divorce Act, 1869 The Maternity Benefits Act, 1961 The Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act, 1937 The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 The Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act, 1939 The Special Marriage Act, 1954 The Hindu Succession Act, 1956 The Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 Indian and Colonial Divorce Jurisdiction Act, 1940 The Anand Marriage Act, 1909 The Arya Marriage Validation Act, 1937 Matrimonial Causes (War Marriages) Act, 1948 The Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 Administrators-General Act, 1963 NRI Related Laws The Emigration Act, 1983 The Foreign Marriage Act, 1969 The Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 Environment Laws Air Crafts (Amendment) Act, 2007 Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act,1981 The Air Corporation (Transfer of Undertaking and Repeal) Act, 1994 The Delhi Prohibition of Smoking and Non-Smokers Health Protection Act, 1996 The Environment (Protection) Act, 1986 The Forest Conservation Act, 1980 The water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 Wild Life (Protection) Amendment Act, 2006 Protection of Plant Varieties and Farmers Rights Act, 2001 Corporate Law The Companies Act 2013 Companies (Foreign Interests) Act, 1918 Company Law Board Regulations, 1991 THE Companies (Amendment) Act, 2006 The Company Act, 1956 (Repealed) The Company Secretaries Act, 1980 The Companies (Donations To National Funds) Act, 1951 The Hire-Purchase Act, 1972 Indian Contract Act, 1872 The Partnership Act, 1932 The Sale of Goods Act, 1930 Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is a procedural law Human Rights Law Commission for protection of Child Right Act 2005 The Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 The Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 Protection of Human Rights (Amendment) Act, 2006 WOMEN - LAWS WOMEN-SPECIFIC LEGISLATION The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 The Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (28 of 1961) (Amended in 1986) The Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986 The Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987 (3 of 1988) Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 The Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (PREVENTION, PROHIBITION and REDRESSAL) Act, 2013 The Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2013 WOMEN-RELATED LEGISLATION The Indian Penal Code,1860 The Indian Evidence Act,1872 Consumer Laws The Competition Act, 2002 The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 The Essential Commodities Act, 1955 Jammu & Kashmir Consumer Protection Act 1987 The Prevention of Black Marketing and Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980

GOLAK NATH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB, 1967 ISSUE In this case, the Petitioner Golak Nath and his family claimed in excess of 500 sections of land in Punjab. Be that as it may, during then the state government made an enactment ‘Punjab Securities and Land Tenures Act’ wherein under this Act, Golak Nath and his family were not permitted to keep in excess of 30 sections of land. Along these lines, Golak Nath recorded a writ request under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution testing the legitimacy of the enactment and that his fundamental right to property was being abused. The issue was whether the parliament has the ability to revise the fundamental rights cherished under Part III of the Constitution of India or not. The candidates contended that the parliament had no capacity to alter fundamental rights, while the respondents contended that our constitution was never implied as static and non-adaptable by the constitution-creators. JUDGMENT In this case, the apex court overruled the judgment given if there should arise an occurrence of Sajjan Singh by most of six: five and held that the revision under Article 368 is ‘law’ inside the importance of Article 13(2). It was additionally governed by the Hon’ble court that Legislature detests the ability to revise Part III of the Constitution to remove or compress fundamental rights. The Supreme Court fought that Fundamental Rights are not amendable as expressed under Article 13 and further more expressed that Article 368 gives the technique to correct the Constitution yet doesn’t present on Parliament the ability to revise the Constitution. Golaknath’s dominant part see mirrors the anxiety and vulnerability in their psyches with respect to the then Parliament’s course. Various enactment that had in some affection penetrated crowded’s FR’s have been passed since the 1950 ‘s Parliament by summoning Article 368. The greater part was suspicious that in the event that Sajjan Singh remained the rule that everyone must follow, at that point a period could come when all the FRs received by our Constituent Assembly would be weakened and in the end stifled by corrections. Sajjan Singh and Shankari Prasad overruled this conceivable elimination of FR’s as a primary concern and dreading the possible progress of Democratic India to most of Totalitarian India. Consequently, to check this colourable exercise of intensity and spare Democracy from dictatorial actions of Parliament, the larger part held that Parliament can’t revise Fundamental Rights. GOLAK NATH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB, 1967 GOLAK NATH VS. STATE OF PUNJAB, 1967 ISSUE In this case, the Petitioner Golak Nath and his family claimed in excess of 500 sections of land in Punjab. Be that as it may, during then the state government made an enactment ‘Punjab Securities and Land Tenures Act’ wherein under this Act, Golak Nath and his family were not permitted to keep in excess of 30 sections of land. Along these lines, Golak Nath recorded a writ request under Article 32 of the Indian Constitution testing the legitimacy of the enactment and that his fundamental right to property was being abused. The issue was whether the parliament has the ability to revise the fundamental rights cherished under Part III of the Constitution of India or not. The candidates contended that the parliament had no capacity to alter fundamental rights, while the respondents contended that our constitution was never implied as static and non-adaptable by the constitution-creators. JUDGMENT In this case, the apex court overruled the judgment given if there should arise an occurrence of Sajjan Singh by most of six: five and held that the revision under Article 368 is ‘law’ inside the importance of Article 13(2). It was additionally governed by the Hon’ble court that Legislature detests the ability to revise Part III of the Constitution to remove or compress fundamental rights. The Supreme Court fought that Fundamental Rights are not amendable as expressed under Article 13 and further more expressed that Article 368 gives the technique to correct the Constitution yet doesn’t present on Parliament the ability to revise the Constitution. Golaknath’s dominant part see mirrors the anxiety and vulnerability in their psyches with respect to the then Parliament’s course. Various enactment that had in some affection penetrated crowded’s FR’s have been passed since the 1950 ‘s Parliament by summoning Article 368. The greater part was suspicious that in the event that Sajjan Singh remained the rule that everyone must follow, at that point a period could come when all the FRs received by our Constituent Assembly would be weakened and in the end stifled by corrections. Sajjan Singh and Shankari Prasad overruled this conceivable elimination of FR’s as a primary concern and dreading the possible progress of Democratic India to most of Totalitarian India. Consequently, to check this colourable exercise of intensity and spare Democracy from dictatorial actions of Parliament, the larger part held that Parliament can’t revise Fundamental Rights.

1. This Rule was issued by this Court under Order IV, rule 30 of the Rules of this Court after receipt of a report from the Bombay High Court that that High Court had, by its order made on the 13th October, 1955 in Civil Application No. 1506 of 1955, suspended the respondent from practice as an Advocate of that High Court for a period of one year from the date of the said order. By the rule the respondent has been required to show cause why, in view of the matter specified in the judgment and order of the Bombay High Court referred to above, appropriate action, disciplinary or otherwise, should not be taken against him by this Court. 2. The respondent is an Advocate of some standing in the Bombay High Court and as such was also enrolled as an Advocate of this Court. It appears that in the earlier part of the year 1953 the Advocate was prosecuted before Mr. Sonavane, one of the Presidency Magistrates at Bombay, on a charge of having committed an offence under the Bombay Prohibition Act. The trial lasted from July 1953 to November 1953. On the 18th November, 1953 the Magistrate convicted the Advocate of the offence with which he was charged and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for one month and to a fine of Rs. 201 and to rigorous imprisonment of four weeks in default of payment of the fine. The Advocate went up on appeal to the High Court. The High Court on the 24th February, 1954 upheld the conviction but altered the sentence to one of fine of Rs. 1,000 only. 3. In the meantime, on the 25th November, 1953, the trial Magistrate, Mr. Sonavane, made a report to the Registrar (Appellate Side) of the Bombay High Court as to the conduct of the Advocate who appeared in person as the accused before him. On a perusal of that report the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court constituted a Tribunal consisting of three members of the Bar Council to enquire into the conduct of the Advocate. The Tribunal issued a summons against the Advocate intimating that it would enquire into his conduct as disclosed in :- (a) the report dated the 25th November, 1953, of Shri T. A. Sonavane, B.A. LL.B., Presidency Magistrate, 18th Court, Girgaum, Bombay, to the Registrar, High Court, Appellate Side, Bombay, regarding Case No. 593/P of 1953 tried by him, and (b) the judgment recorded by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal No. 1532 of 1953 (with Criminal Appeal No. 1564 of 1953) upholding the judgment and order of conviction passed against him by the aforesaid learned Magistrate in the aforesaid case. 4. The proceedings appear to have been somewhat protracted by reason of frequent objections made and petitions filed by the respondent but eventually on or about the 16th March, 1955 the respondent forwarded to the Secretary to the Bar Council Tribunal a copy of a letter addressed by him to the Registrar, High Court, Bombay, and requested the Tribunal to send a report to the High Court in terms of his pleading guilty to the charges leveled against him. He concluded the letter by expressing regret for having wasted the time of the Tribunal. In his letter to the Registrar, the respondent enclosed a separate written apology unconditionally withdrawing his contention that the proceedings before the Tribunal were misconceived in law and admitting that the High Court had full authority in law to refer the matter to the Bar Council Tribunal and further that the statements made by Mr. Sonavane in his report were true except in two respects therein specified. On the 28th March, 1955 the respondent submitted an additional statement clarifying and supplementing his previous apology. Thereupon the Tribunal made a report to the High Court. By this report the Tribunal held, on the respondent's own admission, the allegations in the report of Mr. Sonavane to be proved and recommended that a very serious notice should be taken of the respondent's conduct. As regards the second item in the summons the Tribunal held that the mere conviction of the respondent under the Prohibition Act did not amount to professional or other misconduct under section 10 of the Indian Bar Councils Act and, therefore, found him not guilty of that charge. 5. On a perusal of that report the High Court issued notice to the respondent for final hearing of the matter. The matter came up for final disposal before a Bench consisting of the Chief Justice and Tendolkar, J. on 13th October, 1955. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent offered an unconditional and unqualified apology on behalf of the respondent and pleaded that the ends of justice would be met if the Court only administered a warning to the respondent. After considering the report of the Tribunal the High Court took the view that the misconduct of the respondent was so serious and so grave that a deterrent punishment must be imposed on him. Accordingly, taking everything into consideration, the High Court suspended the respondent from practice for a period of one year from the date of that order. The respondent's application for a certificate of fitness for appeal to this Court having been refused, the respondent filed a petition for special leave to appeal before us. That petition has, however, been dismissed by us. The rule for disciplinary action now remains to be dealt with. 6. In answer to the rule the respondent has filed a petition by way of showing cause. Paragraph 7 of that petition runs as follows :-"7. That the report of the learned Presidency Magistrate, 18th Court, is a highly exaggerated, garbled and manifestly incorrect version of the incidents that occurred during the trial of the case. And looking to the circumstances under which the petitioner was more or less compelled to tender a humiliating apology, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct that a proper inquiry be held in the matter by or under the directions of this Hon'ble Court". 7. Appearing in person before us the respondent has contended with a certain amount of vehemence that he had not had any fair deal before the Tribunal, that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to enter upon the enquiry inasmuch as the misconduct complained of was not committed by him in his capacity as an Advocate, for he appeared in person as the accused in the Prohibition case, that the Tribunal had at one stage held that it had no jurisdiction but had without giving him a hearing gone back on that decision and declined to decide that question in his presence, that the Tribunal failed to formulate any formal charge, that he made an application to the High Court under article 227 for quashing the proceedings for want of jurisdiction but the High Court had rejected that application and declined to give him a certificate of fitness for appeal to this Court and pointed out various other matters which he characterised as showing prejudice and bias on the part of the Tribunal. 8. It was pointed out to the respondent that his application for special leave to appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court having been dismissed we were not, in this Rule, concerned with the proceedings in the Bombay High Court or before the Tribunal of the Bar Council as observed by this Court in In the matter of Mr. G, a Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court . The respondent then fell back upon paragraph 7 of his petition quoted above and asked this Court to hold a fresh enquiry into the matter. From the judgment of the Bombay High Court which is referred to in the Rule issued herein it appears that the respondent had admitted the truth of everything contained in Mr. Sonavane's report except two matters only. In his present petition showing cause he does not, apart from a vague allegation that the report is an exaggerated, garbled and manifestly incorrect version of the incidents that occurred during the trial of the case, refer to and particular statement therein which is exaggerated garbled or incorrect. In view of his unconditional admission of the truth of the statements in the report of Mr. Sonavane we are not prepared to permit him to go back on the same on such vague allegations as are to be found in paragraph 7 of his petition. It is needless for us to emphasise that a person holding the responsible position of an Advocate of a High Court and of this Court cannot be permitted to play with the Court in the way this Advocate has done. He admitted the correctness of the report, confessed his guilt and tendered an unconditional apology evidently in the hope that he would get away with it by merely tendering an apology. Finding that the tactics did not work with the High Court as he expected the same to do, he now wants to charge his tactics by asking for an enquiry which he had himself avoided by means of his admission and apology. This we are not prepared to permit to do. We have carefully gone through the report of Mr. Sonavane and we find ourselves in entire agreement with the High Court when it says that that report makes an extremely sad reading. The conduct of the respondent in the criminal trial was, as pointed out by the High Court, entirely indefensible by any standard. It discloses a continuous and persistent attempt on the part of the respondent to be rude to and contemptuous of the Magistrate, to hold up the trial and to do everything in his power to bring the administration of justice into contempt. Such a conduct, in our opinion, merits severe condemnation. 9. The respondent has drawn our attention to the case of In re Thomas James Wallace ([1866] L.R. 1 P.C. 283), which was followed in In re An Advocate of Benares . We do not conceive that the Privy Council intended to lay down any fixed and rigid rule of law or did anything more than indicate the course which, in the circumstances of that case, it considered to be reasonable, satisfactory and convenient and the Allahabad case simply followed the same. As has been held by a Full Bench of the Bombay High Court in The Advocate-General of Bombay v. Three Advocates ([1934] I.L.R. 59 Bom. 57), the Indian Legislature by using the words "professional or other misconduct" in section 10 of the Indian Bar Councils Act intended to confer on the Court disciplinary jurisdiction to take action in all cases of misconduct whether in a professional or other capacity leaving it to the discretion of Court to take action only in suitable cases. To the like effect is the decision of a Special Bench of the Calcutta High Court in In the matter of an Advocate ([1936] I.L.R. 63 Cal. 867). The pleader concerned in the case of In re a Pleader (I.L.R. [1943] Mad. 459), was certainly not, by shouting slogans in Court, functioning as an Advocate, nevertheless he was dealt with under section 13(f) of the Legal Practitioners Act. Wallace's case (supra) was not a decision on any statutory provision such as we have in the Legal Practitioners Act or the Bar Councils Act. 10. For the reasons stated above and in view of the conduct of the Advocate seen in the light of the surrounding circumstances we are clearly of opinion that the Advocate should, by reason of his having indulged in conduct unworthy of a member of the honourable profession to which he belongs, be suspended from practice for some time. He is an Advocate of this Court and according to a majority decision of this Court he is entitled, under the Supreme Court Advocates (Practice in High Courts) Act, to exercise his profession in all Courts throughout the Union of India. Any suspension for a period less than the period fixed by the Bombay High Court will obviously lead to serious anomaly and inconvenience. We accordingly direct that the Advocate concerned be suspended from practice for a period co-terminous with the period of suspension fixed by the Bombay High Court, namely, up to the 13th October, 1956. Re: D An Advocate Of The Supreme ... vs Unknown on 23 November, 1955 1. This Rule was issued by this Court under Order IV, rule 30 of the Rules of this Court after receipt of a report from the Bombay High Court that that High Court had, by its order made on the 13th October, 1955 in Civil Application No. 1506 of 1955, suspended the respondent from practice as an Advocate of that High Court for a period of one year from the date of the said order. By the rule the respondent has been required to show cause why, in view of the matter specified in the judgment and order of the Bombay High Court referred to above, appropriate action, disciplinary or otherwise, should not be taken against him by this Court. 2. The respondent is an Advocate of some standing in the Bombay High Court and as such was also enrolled as an Advocate of this Court. It appears that in the earlier part of the year 1953 the Advocate was prosecuted before Mr. Sonavane, one of the Presidency Magistrates at Bombay, on a charge of having committed an offence under the Bombay Prohibition Act. The trial lasted from July 1953 to November 1953. On the 18th November, 1953 the Magistrate convicted the Advocate of the offence with which he was charged and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for one month and to a fine of Rs. 201 and to rigorous imprisonment of four weeks in default of payment of the fine. The Advocate went up on appeal to the High Court. The High Court on the 24th February, 1954 upheld the conviction but altered the sentence to one of fine of Rs. 1,000 only. 3. In the meantime, on the 25th November, 1953, the trial Magistrate, Mr. Sonavane, made a report to the Registrar (Appellate Side) of the Bombay High Court as to the conduct of the Advocate who appeared in person as the accused before him. On a perusal of that report the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court constituted a Tribunal consisting of three members of the Bar Council to enquire into the conduct of the Advocate. The Tribunal issued a summons against the Advocate intimating that it would enquire into his conduct as disclosed in :- (a) the report dated the 25th November, 1953, of Shri T. A. Sonavane, B.A. LL.B., Presidency Magistrate, 18th Court, Girgaum, Bombay, to the Registrar, High Court, Appellate Side, Bombay, regarding Case No. 593/P of 1953 tried by him, and (b) the judgment recorded by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal No. 1532 of 1953 (with Criminal Appeal No. 1564 of 1953) upholding the judgment and order of conviction passed against him by the aforesaid learned Magistrate in the aforesaid case. 4. The proceedings appear to have been somewhat protracted by reason of frequent objections made and petitions filed by the respondent but eventually on or about the 16th March, 1955 the respondent forwarded to the Secretary to the Bar Council Tribunal a copy of a letter addressed by him to the Registrar, High Court, Bombay, and requested the Tribunal to send a report to the High Court in terms of his pleading guilty to the charges leveled against him. He concluded the letter by expressing regret for having wasted the time of the Tribunal. In his letter to the Registrar, the respondent enclosed a separate written apology unconditionally withdrawing his contention that the proceedings before the Tribunal were misconceived in law and admitting that the High Court had full authority in law to refer the matter to the Bar Council Tribunal and further that the statements made by Mr. Sonavane in his report were true except in two respects therein specified. On the 28th March, 1955 the respondent submitted an additional statement clarifying and supplementing his previous apology. Thereupon the Tribunal made a report to the High Court. By this report the Tribunal held, on the respondent's own admission, the allegations in the report of Mr. Sonavane to be proved and recommended that a very serious notice should be taken of the respondent's conduct. As regards the second item in the summons the Tribunal held that the mere conviction of the respondent under the Prohibition Act did not amount to professional or other misconduct under section 10 of the Indian Bar Councils Act and, therefore, found him not guilty of that charge. 5. On a perusal of that report the High Court issued notice to the respondent for final hearing of the matter. The matter came up for final disposal before a Bench consisting of the Chief Justice and Tendolkar, J. on 13th October, 1955. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent offered an unconditional and unqualified apology on behalf of the respondent and pleaded that the ends of justice would be met if the Court only administered a warning to the respondent. After considering the report of the Tribunal the High Court took the view that the misconduct of the respondent was so serious and so grave that a deterrent punishment must be imposed on him. Accordingly, taking everything into consideration, the High Court suspended the respondent from practice for a period of one year from the date of that order. The respondent's application for a certificate of fitness for appeal to this Court having been refused, the respondent filed a petition for special leave to appeal before us. That petition has, however, been dismissed by us. The rule for disciplinary action now remains to be dealt with. 6. In answer to the rule the respondent has filed a petition by way of showing cause. Paragraph 7 of that petition runs as follows :-"7. That the report of the learned Presidency Magistrate, 18th Court, is a highly exaggerated, garbled and manifestly incorrect version of the incidents that occurred during the trial of the case. And looking to the circumstances under which the petitioner was more or less compelled to tender a humiliating apology, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct that a proper inquiry be held in the matter by or under the directions of this Hon'ble Court". 7. Appearing in person before us the respondent has contended with a certain amount of vehemence that he had not had any fair deal before the Tribunal, that the Tribunal had no jurisdiction to enter upon the enquiry inasmuch as the misconduct complained of was not committed by him in his capacity as an Advocate, for he appeared in person as the accused in the Prohibition case, that the Tribunal had at one stage held that it had no jurisdiction but had without giving him a hearing gone back on that decision and declined to decide that question in his presence, that the Tribunal failed to formulate any formal charge, that he made an application to the High Court under article 227 for quashing the proceedings for want of jurisdiction but the High Court had rejected that application and declined to give him a certificate of fitness for appeal to this Court and pointed out various other matters which he characterised as showing prejudice and bias on the part of the Tribunal. 8. It was pointed out to the respondent that his application for special leave to appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court having been dismissed we were not, in this Rule, concerned with the proceedings in the Bombay High Court or before the Tribunal of the Bar Council as observed by this Court in In the matter of Mr. G, a Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court . The respondent then fell back upon paragraph 7 of his petition quoted above and asked this Court to hold a fresh enquiry into the matter. From the judgment of the Bombay High Court which is referred to in the Rule issued herein it appears that the respondent had admitted the truth of everything contained in Mr. Sonavane's report except two matters only. In his present petition showing cause he does not, apart from a vague allegation that the report is an exaggerated, garbled and manifestly incorrect version of the incidents that occurred during the trial of the case, refer to and particular statement therein which is exaggerated garbled or incorrect. In view of his unconditional admission of the truth of the statements in the report of Mr. Sonavane we are not prepared to permit him to go back on the same on such vague allegations as are to be found in paragraph 7 of his petition. It is needless for us to emphasise that a person holding the responsible position of an Advocate of a High Court and of this Court cannot be permitted to play with the Court in the way this Advocate has done. He admitted the correctness of the report, confessed his guilt and tendered an unconditional apology evidently in the hope that he would get away with it by merely tendering an apology. Finding that the tactics did not work with the High Court as he expected the same to do, he now wants to charge his tactics by asking for an enquiry which he had himself avoided by means of his admission and apology. This we are not prepared to permit to do. We have carefully gone through the report of Mr. Sonavane and we find ourselves in entire agreement with the High Court when it says that that report makes an extremely sad reading. The conduct of the respondent in the criminal trial was, as pointed out by the High Court, entirely indefensible by any standard. It discloses a continuous and persistent attempt on the part of the respondent to be rude to and contemptuous of the Magistrate, to hold up the trial and to do everything in his power to bring the administration of justice into contempt. Such a conduct, in our opinion, merits severe condemnation. 9. The respondent has drawn our attention to the case of In re Thomas James Wallace ([1866] L.R. 1 P.C. 283), which was followed in In re An Advocate of Benares . We do not conceive that the Privy Council intended to lay down any fixed and rigid rule of law or did anything more than indicate the course which, in the circumstances of that case, it considered to be reasonable, satisfactory and convenient and the Allahabad case simply followed the same. As has been held by a Full Bench of the Bombay High Court in The Advocate-General of Bombay v. Three Advocates ([1934] I.L.R. 59 Bom. 57), the Indian Legislature by using the words "professional or other misconduct" in section 10 of the Indian Bar Councils Act intended to confer on the Court disciplinary jurisdiction to take action in all cases of misconduct whether in a professional or other capacity leaving it to the discretion of Court to take action only in suitable cases. To the like effect is the decision of a Special Bench of the Calcutta High Court in In the matter of an Advocate ([1936] I.L.R. 63 Cal. 867). The pleader concerned in the case of In re a Pleader (I.L.R. [1943] Mad. 459), was certainly not, by shouting slogans in Court, functioning as an Advocate, nevertheless he was dealt with under section 13(f) of the Legal Practitioners Act. Wallace's case (supra) was not a decision on any statutory provision such as we have in the Legal Practitioners Act or the Bar Councils Act. 10. For the reasons stated above and in view of the conduct of the Advocate seen in the light of the surrounding circumstances we are clearly of opinion that the Advocate should, by reason of his having indulged in conduct unworthy of a member of the honourable profession to which he belongs, be suspended from practice for some time. He is an Advocate of this Court and according to a majority decision of this Court he is entitled, under the Supreme Court Advocates (Practice in High Courts) Act, to exercise his profession in all Courts throughout the Union of India. Any suspension for a period less than the period fixed by the Bombay High Court will obviously lead to serious anomaly and inconvenience. We accordingly direct that the Advocate concerned be suspended from practice for a period co-terminous with the period of suspension fixed by the Bombay High Court, namely, up to the 13th October, 1956.