New Delhi [India], May 15 : The Supreme Court on Friday expressed concern over the growing number of lawyers allegedly holding fake law degrees, and observed that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) should ideally investigate the issue.
A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said, "thousands of fraudulent people wearing black robes with serious doubts about their degrees".
The CJI remarked that he was waiting for an appropriate case to order a CBI investigation into the law degrees of many Delhi advocates, who are posting many things on social media, and the CBI needs to do something.
"I have serious doubts about the genuineness of their law degrees... the things they are posting on Facebook, YouTube, etc., do they think we are not watching?"
The observations of the apex court came during the hearing of a plea saying the Delhi High Court has failed in implementing the Supreme Court's guidelines on the designation of senior advocates.
As the lawyer apologised, the CJI said that there were enough "parasites" in society who are attacking the judiciary, and said that lawyers should not join hands with them.
"There are already parasites of society who attack the system, and you want to join hands with them? There are youngsters like cockroaches, who don't get any employment and don't have a place in a profession. Some of them become media, some of them become social media, some of them become RTI activists, some of them become other activists, and they start attacking everyone... and you people file contempt petitions," said the CJI.
It declined to entertain the petition and also objected to the language used by the petitioner's advocate, Sanjay Dubey, on social media.
"Let people understand the kind of language you are using on Facebook. I will show you what discipline in the profession means," the CJI said.
Justice Bagchi also questioned whether the lawyer whether the senior advocate designation was being treated merely as a status symbol instead of a means to contribute meaningfully to the justice delivery system.
The petitioner later chose to withdraw the plea.
The lawyer had earlier filed a writ petition challenging the Delhi High Court decision refusing to consider him for designation as a senior advocate. He later moved a contempt plea alleging non-compliance with an earlier direction issued by the Supreme Court. However, the apex court had dismissed the contempt petition in December last year.
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor