Maharashtra Accepts Bombay HC’s Request to Allow Lawyers to Travel in Local Trains on Experimental Basis

Must Read

Bombay High Court Passes Order To Clarify and Modify Previous Order When State of Maharashtra Moved Praecipe

Division Bench of Bombay High Court consisting of Justice S. V. Gangapurwala and Justice Shrikant D. Kulkarni had passed...

The European Court of Human Rights Orders Germany To Pay Non-Pecuniary Damages for Prison Strip-Searches 

A serving German prisoner was repeatedly stripped searched for non-legitimate purposes. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) found...

Lack of Independent Witness Doesn’t Vitiate Conviction: Supreme Court

A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Rajesh Dhiman v State of Himachal Pradesh clarified the law in...

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi,...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent...

Supreme Court Stays Order Restraining Physical Campaigns in the Madhya Pradesh Bye-Elections

On the 26th of October, a Bench was set up which comprised Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, and...

Follow us

A Public Interest Litigation was filed in the Bombay High Court (HC) in relation to permitting lawyers to utilize the local train services while attending physical hearings. After obtaining consent from the Union of India and the State Government, the Bombay HC directed the Registry to issue day passes for eligible Advocates.

Brief Facts

A bunch of PIL’s was filed in the Bombay HC by Chirag Chanani, Sagar Sahani, Nitin Patil, and Ashley Kusher. During the previous hearing for the same, the Division Bench consisting of Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice G.S. Kulkarni had suggested allowing lawyers to utilize the local train services while attending physical hearings. This was recommended in light of the information that many lawyers were unable to appear for physical hearings in Court due to the lack of any other mode of transportation.

Respondent’s Submissions

The respondent’s – the Union of India and the State Government consented to consider the Court’s request on an experimental basis.

After taking requisite instructions, the Advocate General (AG) placed on record, a brief note that would set out arrangements that could be made for lawyers attending physical hearings. The aforesaid note specified the steps to be taken by advocates to obtain a certification to that effect from the registrar. After issuance of the certificate, the respective advocate could then approach the appropriate railway authorities for issuance of a travel pass. The AG stated that such an arrangement would only be on an experimental basis and specifically for advocates attending physical hearings.

The Learned Additional Solicitor General (ASG), after obtaining instructions from the railways, stated that they agreed to the same as suggested on behalf of the State.

Court’s Observations

The Court accepted the arrangement as suggested by the Union and the State and as agreed by the Railways. However, it noted that in light of the present situation, no individual requests except for the advocates required to appear for the physical hearing would be considered. These applications would be considered on the adjourned date of hearing, i.e. 6th October 2020.

Court’s Order

The Court directed that the arrangement would be in operation from 18th September 2020 up until 7th October 2020. The Court issued the following order:

  1. The concerned advocate who intends to physically appear before the Benches of this Court at its principal seat at Mumbai shall apply to the designated registrar of the High Court seeking a day’s pass relating to the particular date only on which his/her matter is listed for hearing before one of the four Benches of this High Court. The designated registrar only after confirming the correctness of the claim so made in the application in terms of the present arrangement via email will issue a certification of the requirement for a particular day to the concerned advocate.
  2. Upon receipt of such certification from the designated registrar, the advocate concerned will approach the railway authorities to obtain appropriate pass/document for travel or ticket permitting him/her to avail the local train services, for the particular day for which travel permission is required.
  3. The railway authorities after verifying the pass so issued will issue appropriate travel documents/ticket etc., as the case may be, permitting travel by local train services to the applicant/advocate for the particular day.
  4. The above arrangement would be available to the applicant/advocate only and who satisfies all the above conditions.
  5. The arrangement will continue to operate on an experimental basis up to 7th October 2020 with effect from 18th September 2020.

In conclusion, the Bombay HC asserted that the certification issued shouldn’t be misused in any manner whatsoever by the concerned advocate. In case of misuse, the Court noted that the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa would take appropriate action as may be permissible in law.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgments from the Court. Follow us on Google NewsInstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can also subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Bombay High Court Passes Order To Clarify and Modify Previous Order When State of Maharashtra Moved Praecipe

Division Bench of Bombay High Court consisting of Justice S. V. Gangapurwala and Justice Shrikant D. Kulkarni had passed an Order on 25th October...

The European Court of Human Rights Orders Germany To Pay Non-Pecuniary Damages for Prison Strip-Searches 

A serving German prisoner was repeatedly stripped searched for non-legitimate purposes. The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) found that Germany had violated the...

Lack of Independent Witness Doesn’t Vitiate Conviction: Supreme Court

A three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Rajesh Dhiman v State of Himachal Pradesh clarified the law in case of lack of independent...

Madras High Court Observes Unexplained Delay in Procedural Safeguards, Quashes Detention Through Writ Petition

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a writ of Habeas Corpus. The petitioner P. Lakshmi, called for records of the...

UK Court of Appeal Rules Home Department’s Deportation Policy of Immigrants Unlawful

Britain’s Court of Appeal quashed the Home Department’s deportation policy, declaring it unlawful; criticizing it for being too stringent on immigrants to comply with. Background The...

Supreme Court Stays Order Restraining Physical Campaigns in the Madhya Pradesh Bye-Elections

On the 26th of October, a Bench was set up which comprised Justice AM Khanwilkar, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, and Justice Sanjiv Khanna. They heard...

Inordinate and Unexplained Delay in Considering Representation by Government Renders Detention Order Illegal: Madras High Court

A Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution was filed in the Madras High Court to declare the detention order of the husband of...

Supreme Court Asks Petitioner to Approach Bombay High Court in PIL for CBI Probe in Disha Salian Case

On the 26th of October 2020, the Apex Court heard the PIL praying for a CBI probe into the death of Disha Salian. The...

Privy Council Clarifies Approach To Winding up in “Deadlock” Cases in the Case of Chu v. Lau

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council clarified several aspects of the law concerning just and equitable winding-up petitions, as well as shareholder disputes...

Madras High Court Directs Hospital To Submit Necessary Medical Reports to Authorization Committee for Approval of Kidney Transplant

A Writ Petition was filed under Article 226 to issue a Writ of Mandamus to K.G. Hospital, Coimbatore by P. Sankar & V. Sobana....

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -