Latest news with #NoObjectionCertificate
The Hindu
10 hours ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
Telangana HC notices to Chief Secretary, Naveen Mittal in octogenarian's pleas
Justice N. Tukaramji of Telangana High Court on Thursday (June 19, 2025) issued notices to senior IAS officer Naveen Mittal and three others in a criminal petition filed by an octogenarian Shanti Agarwal seeking a direction to set aside a trial court order which kept in abeyance criminal action against four of them. The petitioner, represented by her son Atul Agarwal, wanted the HC to dismiss the order of the 12th Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate. The trial court passed the order in a case filed by Shanti Agarwal to take cognisance of the charges against the IAS officer and three others in a land related matter. According to the petitioner, she purchased an evacuee property of 5,262 square yards of land in Nanalnagar of Gudimalkapur in Hyderabad in 1965. She contended that IAS officer Naveen Mittal in 2011 while serving as Hyderabad district Collector gave No Objection Certificate to some persons unconnected to the said land. She claimed that she had moved the HC which dismissed the NOC issued by Naveen Mittal and recommended disciplinary action against Mittal and some other Revenue officials accused of involvement in issuing the NOC. Meanwhile, the trial court passed an order keeping in abeyance the action of taking cognisance of the charges against the IAS officer and others. Challenging this, the petitioner filed criminal petition. In a related development, Justice K. Lakshman of the HC issued notices to the Chief Secretary, Naveen Mittal and R. Keshavulu (Inspector in Land Survey and Records department) in a writ petition filed by Shanti Agarwal. In this petition, she sought a direction to Chief Secretary to prosecute Naveen Mittal and R. Keshavulu in the backdrop of a single judge order to initiate disciplinary action against them. The petitioner contended that she represented to the Chief Secretary to prosecute Naveen Mittal in the backdrop of the HC single judge pronouncing order to initiate action against him in issuing NOC over her land at Nanalnagar.
The Hindu
21 hours ago
- Business
- The Hindu
BCI hits back at Society of Indian Law Firms over foreign law firm rules
The Bar Council of India (BCI) on Thursday (June 19, 2025) pushed back against criticism from the Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF), the apex body of law firms in India, over its recent move to let foreign lawyers and law firms work in India in a limited capacity. Responding to SILF's public statements, the BCI — the regulatory authority for the legal profession — said the group does not speak for most Indian law firms, especially smaller and newer ones. 'It (SILF) functions primarily as a closed group dominated by a few large, well-established firms. Its stance and actions do not reflect the concerns or aspirations of more than 90% of India's smaller or emerging law firms,' BCI said. Also read: India warms to foreign law firms, but legal concerns simmer In May 2025, the BCI introduced a notification permitting foreign lawyers to function in non-litigious areas only. BCI said the decision was 'based on extensive consultations and overwhelmingly positive feedback from Indian law firms across the country'. 'Contrary to the misleading claims being circulated, these rules do not allow foreign lawyers to practice Indian law, litigate in Indian courts, or appear before any Indian tribunal or statutory authority,' it said. The rules restrict foreign law firms and lawyers strictly to advisory roles in non-litigious matters involving foreign law, international law, or international commercial arbitration, all subject to regulatory oversight and a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Government of India. Committee set up BCI said it has already constituted a high-level committee chaired by Cyril Shroff and comprising senior partners from leading law firms, who have been tasked with reviewing the rules and incorporating feedback from stakeholders, including SILF. The council has also resolved to individually engage with law firms nationwide and are working to convene a national-level conference of Indian law firms in Mumbai this September. 'Old win in new bottle' While speaking to The Hindu last month, SILF chairman Lalit Bhasin while welcoming the entry of foreign law firms and lawyers in India raised a few legal concerns. Mr. Bhasin said the BCI's move might go against a 2018 Supreme Court ruling. While the earlier 2023 BCI notification was put on hold, he said that the latest notification feels like 'old wine in a new bottle'. He also suggested that Parliament should step in and amend the law to avoid confusion. On the other hand, the BCI targeted SILF saying it has 'historically acted to preserve its members commercial interests at the expense of young, deserving Indian lawyers and new legal practices striving to grow in an increasingly competitive and global legal arena'. BCI alleged that many of the firms comprising SILF have maintained 'close, long-standing professional affiliations with major foreign law firms'. 'These affiliations have enabled a parallel legal services economy, wherein foreign legal work is funnelled through select Indian firms. This has systematically denied fair opportunities to the vast majority of Indian legal practitioners,' it said. It also stated that SILF has, for over 20 years, opposed any serious engagement with foreign firms — hurting Indian law firms that want to grow internationally.
India Gazette
a day ago
- Business
- India Gazette
Bar Council stands by foreign law firm policy amid SILF resistance
New Delhi [India], June 19 (ANI): The Bar Council of India (BCI) has initiated a nationwide consultative process led by a high-level expert committee to review feedback on its amended Rules for Registration and Regulation of Foreign Lawyers and Foreign Law Firms in India, 2025. The move comes amid criticism from the Society of Indian Law Firms (SILF), which the BCI has accused of monopolising access to international legal work and misrepresenting the broader interests of the Indian legal community. The expert panel, chaired by eminent corporate lawyer Cyril Shroff, includes senior legal figures such as Ajay Bahl, Suhail Nathani, Sandip Bhagat, Mahesh Agarwal, and Amit Kapur. It has been tasked with collecting and incorporating stakeholder suggestions while reaffirming the BCI's commitment to fairness, accountability, and legal sovereignty. The Bar Council has invited written submissions from law firms, professionals, and the public within 15 days. The points of reference for the consultation are available on the official BCI website, according to the BCI statement issued on Thursday... The BCI's response targets what it describes as SILF's 'obstructionist stance,' asserting that the group represents only a small clique of large, established firms and not the majority of India's 90-95% small and mid-sized practices. These emerging firms, the BCI argues, have long been excluded from cross-border legal opportunities due to the gatekeeping and foreign affiliations maintained by SILF's dominant members. The Bar Council emphasised that its amended 2025 Regulations are designed to democratise access to global legal practice, particularly for young lawyers and underrepresented law firms seeking international exposure. Contrary to SILF's claims, BCI clarified that foreign law firms are not permitted to practice Indian law, appear before courts or tribunals, or handle litigation-related matters. The 2025 Regulations, as clarified by the BCI, impose strict boundaries on foreign participation: No practice of Indian law in any form is allowed. No appearances in Indian courts, tribunals, or quasi-judicial authorities (Rule 8(2)(b)). Permitted activities are confined to advisory roles involving foreign law, public/private international law, or international arbitration. Prohibited activities include conveyancing, title verification, and legal drafting related to Indian proceedings (Rule 8(2)(c)). International arbitration participation is allowed only where disputes involve foreign law or non-Indian parties (Rule 8(2)(e)). All foreign firms must first obtain a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the Government of India (Rule 4(a)). In a bid to make policymaking more inclusive, BCI has also announced a National Conference of Indian Law Firms to be held in Mumbai in September 2025. The event will provide a platform for nationwide participation, particularly from regional and smaller firms traditionally excluded from SILF's centralised control. Simultaneously, the BCI is working to create a central registry of law firms and their lawyers, which will eventually enable a democratically elected national body to represent India's legal profession--a contrast to SILF, which the BCI notes has not held internal elections for decades. The BCI alleged that SILF's core motivation stems from fear of losing its exclusive foreign work pipeline. 'Many of these same firms already maintain foreign offices or unofficial tie-ups with foreign law firms,' said the Council. 'Their opposition is not to foreign entry per se, but to the possibility that foreign clients may choose to engage with newer and smaller Indian firms instead.' BCI has firmly rejected claims that the amended rules compromise India's legal independence. 'The Regulations explicitly protect Indian legal sovereignty. No foreign lawyer or firm will be allowed to interpret, argue, or practice Indian law,' the statement reads. Any attempt to circumvent the provisions by Indian or foreign entities will attract regulatory action, including monetary penalties, suspension of registration, disqualification, and possible disciplinary or criminal proceedings, the BCI stated in the statement. The BCI has reiterated that the Regulations are legally valid, currently in force, and not under abeyance or judicial challenge. They are designed to uplift the entire legal profession, especially young, talented advocates who seek a global presence. While the Council expressed its openness to genuine concerns, it condemned misinformation campaigns and fear-mongering. 'The BCI is committed to reform--not for the few, but for the many,' it stated. 'The future of Indian law must be inclusive, competitive, and global.' (ANI)
Express Tribune
2 days ago
- Politics
- Express Tribune
CJ's NOC now mandatory for SC judges' travel
Supreme Court judges are now required to obtain a No Objection Certificate (NOC) from the chief justice of Pakistan (CJP) prior to travelling abroad under newly issued regulations that have prompted concerns within the legal fraternity regarding judicial autonomy. The direction follows a recently promulgated Presidential Order by President Asif Ali Zardari — titled Supreme Court Judges (Leave, Pension and Privileges) (Amendment) Order 2025 — through which paragraph 14 of the President's Order 2 of 1997 has been amended. According to the amended provision, the Chief Justice has been granted explicit authority to approve or deny leave, whether domestic or foreign, as well as revoke or curtail any previously approved leave for judges of the apex court. Following the presidential directive, the Supreme Court Registrar, Muhammad Salim Khan, issued a general standing order outlining Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) that will now regulate judges' leave and travel. The issuance of these SOPs has raised eyebrows in the legal fraternity. Some lawyers suggest that the new framework appears aimed at controlling judges, particularly those who voice concerns about the judiciary at events held outside the country. "Travel restrictions per se do not conflict with judicial independence provided they are purely administrative, applied fairly and operate within the judiciary's internal framework, not under the executive control. In the instant case, the purpose seems to be supervisory, not administrative," former additional attorney general Tariq Mahmood Khokhar said. "It is potentially a tool for control and, or intimidation. Judicial independence means independence in decision-making, but judges' travel restrictions can violate independence if permission is used selectively or punitively or under executive interference," he added. Khokhar warned that the amendment lacks adequate safeguards against abuse.
NDTV
4 days ago
- Entertainment
- NDTV
Vidhu Vinod Chopra's Son Plays In US Cricket League Despite Tough BCCI Laws. Here's How
Agni Chopra, son of filmmaker Vidhu Vinod Chopra, is currently playing for MI New York in the ongoing Major League Cricket (MLC). The 26-year-old previously played domestic cricket in India with his latest outing coming in the 2024-25 Ranji Trophy season. As a result, it came as a surprise for many that he is playing in an overseas league considering the tough BCCI stance in this matter. BCCI does not allow any active cricketer to play in any overseas cricket league and they can only play in these competitions after their retirement or after procuring a No Objection Certificate (NOC). However, the reason behind Agni's exemption is simple: He does not hold an Indian passport. Agni was born in Detroit, Michigan and as a result, he is exempt from the BCCI rule regarding overseas cricket league participation. However, under the new BCCI rules, he will also not be able to play in the domestic leagues until he becomes an Indian citizen. Agni became the first player to score First Class centuries in each of his first four matches. During the 2023-24 Ranji season, he was a top performer for Mizoram and earned a lot of praise from experts. Earlier, he said that he would have applied for an Indian passport if he was picked for the Indian Premier League (IPL). However, despite expressing his wish to play in the league on multiple occasions, he was not picked by any of the franchises and he decided to play in the United States-based league. 'I would have still applied for an Indian passport and stayed if I had been picked in the Indian Premier League but [I am] looking forward to my time in America now,' he told Times of India.
