A single judge of the Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court took suo motu cognizance of criminal contempt against the law firm Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas for allegedly misquoting an earlier judgment in a pre-litigation legal notice. A Division Bench closed the proceedings, holding that a bona fide — even erroneous — reading of a judgment is not contempt absent wilful distortion. A digest of the facts, the ratio, and what it means for advocates.
On 26 May 2026, an Allahabad High Court division bench quashed an FIR, chargesheet and cognizance order against an advocate prosecuted for conspiracy after he filed a GST statutory appeal on behalf of his client using the Electronic Credit Ledger for pre-deposit.
On 14 May 2024, the Supreme Court held that advocates' services fall outside the Consumer Protection Act, and doubted V.P. Shantha, referring the doctors question to a larger bench.