MUST WATCH -

BIG BREAKING NEWS 🚨 CJI Chandrachud calls security to remove Petitioner's lawyer Mathews Nedumpara during NEET hearing. HEATED VERBAL EXCHANGE - Mathews : I can answer your question. I am the senior most from all the lawyers here. I am the amicus. CJI: No. I have not appointed any amicus. Nedumpara: I will answer your question CJI: I don’t want you to answer the question. Sit down otherwise I will have you removed from the court. Nedumpara: If you don’t respect me, I myself will leave. CJI: When Mr Hooda is arguing, I don’t want anyone to intervene Nedumpara: I have only one thing to say CJI: (To this staff) Please call the security and have Mr Nedumpara removed from the court Nedumpara: I am leaving. Don't disrespect me. I have been here since 1979

This guy is not Manu Singhvi or Kapil Sibal . So Cji will not respect

Mr. Chandrachud was patience personified. Unfortunately, that only encourages such ridiculous behavior by the lawyer concerned.

Not sure why the experienced lawyer had to misbehave like this.

Good he was thrown out

The Supreme Court has confirmed that the NEET exam will not be repeated as there has been no systematic leak of the question paper. The correct answer to the disputed question is recognized as option 4. CJI Chandrachud said that at the present stage there is no material which can prove malpractices in the examination results or systemic violations in the examination conduct.

Why these lawyer think they are above CJI??...If CJi said keep quiet and let finish mr hooda then why he intrupt??

What's wrong, this advocate is continuously interrupting even without listening to CJI. CJI is absolutely correct - correct every one Must Watch 👍

@barandbench Why CJI removing an advocate ,he has all capabilities,qualifications to converstae ,Argue with CJI How can CJI threaten one own colleague,he is not a common man

Why isn't all the cases broadcasted?

*Mathews J. Nedumpara* President, NLC 20.07.2024. *Corruption in Judiciary and the need to bring an urgent mechanism to deal with it.* of my clients, an MSME, Perfect Infraengineers Ltd., engaged in the manufacture of Hybrid Thermal Solar Panels, received a call from one Ms. Mahi Bhatt on 23rd March, 2024, claiming to be representing the members of NCLT-I, Mumbai, demanding a bribe of Rs. 75 lakhs. The NCLT in the forenoon that day had adjourned an application under Section 7 of the IBC filed by a financial creditor, for pronouncement of orders. The caller informed by client that if the payment is not made, the NCLT will appoint an IRP. In other words, her company would be taken over and sold. Nothing can be deemed to be an absolute truth unless one has seen it with one’s own eyes. But the overwhelming circumstances in this case left with me with little choice but to believe my client. The reason: the tribunal had never heard my client. The case was never argued because my client was before the Bombay High Court and later in the Supreme Court seeking protection under the MSMED Act. On 8.7.2024, the SC allowed my client’s appeal and directed the Bombay High court to reconsider its decision on my client’s rights as an MSME. 2.Since the NCLT did not accede to my client’s plea for an opportunity to be heard, she approached the High Court of Bombay and the High Court in turn directed the NCLT to hear her application for an opportunity to be heard, as also her plea for recusal. Immediately on the order of the Supreme Court allowing my client’s SLP being passed, I made a request that no orders be passed till a copy of the order of the SC is made available. However, paying no heed to my client’s plea, the NCLT passed an order on 15.7.2024 appointing the IRP, causing injury to my client. 3.What is stated above is not an isolated instance. Every lawyer, except the progeny, face similar situations, blatant injustice more frequently than one would believe. 4.Judicial corruption and unjust and arbitrary decisions, it is no exaggeration to say, is almost the order of the day. The reason is that a person aggrieved by an unjust and illegal order of a court or tribunal has no means to remedy the injustice suffered by him except to seek correction by way of appeal or revision, or Articles 226, 32 and 136. The judicial officer who has acted unfairly or who is even guilty of corrupt practices, face no adverse consequence at all. Our judges are not accountable to anyone. Once a lawyer is appointed as a judge of the High Court, often for considerations of kinship and connections more than anything else, he is a de facto emperor, accountable to none. Ever since I had joined the bar four decades back, there has been a discussion on judicial accountability and the need to bring into existence a credible system where litigants and lawyers aggrieved by the willful denial of justice on account of corruption and other malpractices could secure justice. However, such efforts have not seen the light of day. The Judicial Standards and Accountability Bill, 2010, continues to remain in cold storage. What is still worse is the Ninety Nine Constitution (Amendment) Act and the NJAC Act intended to bring in open selection and transparency in judicial appointments being aborted before its birth by a judicial coup headed by Adv. Fali Nariman. 5. With the 2024 General Elections refusing to give a clear majority to the BJP, it is very unlikely that the Government would muster the courage to usher in any mechanism for judicial accountability, much less abolish the collegium which has proven to be a synonym for nepotism and favouritism. The scenario that emerges is least promising. With the advent of the PILs, the Supreme Court has usurped to itself unthinkable powers. For the opposition, irrespective of the political ideology, PIL has been a means to corner the government. 1/2