Introduction:

In a significant development on February 9, the Supreme Court, presided over by Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal, suggested compulsory training for lawyers following observed lapses in handling a bail application. The case revolves around Souvik Bhattacharya, implicated in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act concerning the Teachers’ Recruitment Scam in West Bengal. Despite no summon order, Souvik surrendered, leading to the trial court denying bail, a decision upheld by the High Court. Seeking relief, Souvik filed a Special Leave Petition (Crl.) in the Supreme Court.

Arguments:

Senior Counsel Siddharth Luthra, representing Souvik, emphasized the absence of a summoning order, asserting that remand or arrest without one is unwarranted. Acknowledging a mistake in filing the initial bail application, Luthra highlighted the need for education among lawyers. Justice Bela Trivedi proposed mandatory training for lawyers similar to judges, expressing concern over the lack of action against the lawyer’s oversight. Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju argued Souvik’s voluntary surrender, but Justice Trivedi questioned the absence of a summoning order and stressed the need for a court order before any actions.

Court’s Judgment:

While inclined to grant bail, the court granted a week for the Additional Solicitor General to verify the trial court’s order. Justice Trivedi insisted on a proper summoning order, emphasizing that the court must decide whether cognizance should be taken or a summon is required. The court’s oral observations underscored the necessity for a systematic legal education system, proposing compulsory training courses for all lawyers, with renewal examinations every 5 or 10 years.