{"id":373432,"date":"2026-01-22T11:00:06","date_gmt":"2026-01-22T05:30:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=373432"},"modified":"2026-01-29T17:09:25","modified_gmt":"2026-01-29T11:39:25","slug":"del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/","title":{"rendered":"Bar Association Not ‘State’, No Writ of Mandamus maintainable for alleged trespass in Court Chamber: Delhi High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court:<\/span> In an intra-court appeal arising from a dispute concerning possession and use of a lawyers’ chamber at the Patiala House Courts and the scope of writ jurisdiction against a Bar Association, a Division Bench of Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya,* CJ.<\/span>, and Tejas Karia, J., dismissed the appeal and held that a Bar Association registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860<\/a> is a private body of lawyers and does not perform public functions. It is neither “State” nor an instrumentality of State under Article 12<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>, and therefore, no writ of mandamus can be issued against it under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Factual Matrix<\/h3>\n

In the instant matter, the appellant is an Advocate enrolled with the Bar Council in the year 2000. She asserted that she has been a regular practitioner since 2000 and has represented Government agencies and autonomous bodies, and has been on the Senior Panel of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited since 2011, as also on the Senior Panels of Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited, Delhi Jal Board, Municipal Corporation of Delhi and other bodies.<\/p>\n

In the year 2013, one Mr. Asgar Ali approached the appellant and informed her that he was the allottee of Chamber No. 279A at Patiala House Courts. He requested her to use the said chamber on rent. The appellant agreed and started functioning from the said chamber on a monthly rent basis.<\/p>\n

The appellant alleged that on a particular day, when she returned from Tis Hazari Courts to the said chamber, she found that Mr. Asgar Ali along with ten other persons were occupying her chamber after breaking open the lock. It was further alleged that these persons threatened, abused and pressurised her to remove her belongings and vacate the chamber.<\/p>\n

It was also the appellant’s case that on 04-02-2023, instead of helping her, the office bearers of the New Delhi Bar Association threatened her to vacate the chamber and a lock of the Bar Association was put on the chamber, rendering her belongings, including case files of various Government departments, inaccessible.<\/p>\n

The appellant further alleged that despite informing the police, no action was taken and she was advised to approach the Chairperson of the Bar Association. She submitted representations and reminders to the Bar Association and to the Principal District and Sessions Judge, Patiala House Courts, but received no response.<\/p>\n

On 06-03-2023, she received a call while appearing before the Central Administrative Tribunal informing her that her files and documents had been thrown out of the chamber and were lying on the street.<\/p>\n

Procedural History<\/h3>\n

By order dated 17-03-2023, the Single Judge directed the District Judge In-charge, Patiala House Courts, to gain access to the chamber and enable the appellant to remove her belongings. The District Judge later reported that the belongings had been removed. Thereafter, the Single Judge directed that the keys be handed over to Mr. Asgar Ali, who undertook that he would use the chamber personally and would not sub-let it for monetary consideration.<\/p>\n

A preliminary objection was raised regarding maintainability on the ground that the Bar Association is neither “State” nor an instrumentality of State within the meaning of Article 12<\/a> of the Constitution<\/a>. By order dated 30-10-2023, the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition and held that the appellant was not an allottee of the chamber but was only in permissive possession, in absence of any right over the chamber, the writ petition was not maintainable, remedies for criminal trespass were available under the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> (CrPC) and Bar Association was not amenable to writ jurisdiction.<\/p>\n

Moot Point<\/h3>\n

Whether a writ of mandamus could be issued against the New Delhi Bar Association and whether the writ petition seeking directions for criminal action was maintainable under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>?<\/p>\n

Court’s Analysis<\/h3>\n

The Court held that even with respect to prayer ‘B’, “issue a Writ in the nature of mandamus or other suitable writ or order or direction thereby directing the Respondent No. 1 and\/or Bar Council of Delhi to take appropriate action against the said Advocates, who have indulged in illegal and criminal activities of committing criminal acts trespassing in respect of the Chamber in question”<\/span>, the writ petition was not maintainable.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that the New Delhi Bar Association is “an Association of Lawyers registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860<\/a> and the primary object of the Bar Association is to ensure welfare of its members.”<\/span><\/p>\n

The Court stated that Bar Association is a body of private individual lawyers and “in normal discharge of its functions, it does not perform any function which can be said to be a public function.”<\/span> The Court categorically observed that “it is in fact, a purely private entity and cannot in any manner or for any reason whatsoever be termed to be ‘State’ or its instrumentality or agency or authority.”<\/span><\/p>\n

The Court held that Bar Association is not a public body therefore it is not covered under Article 12<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>. Accordingly, the Court held that Court, in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 226<\/a> of the Constitution of India<\/a>, can’t issue writ of Mandamus to Bar Association.<\/p>\n

As regards the allegation of criminal trespass, the Court held that such acts may warrant criminal action, but for that purpose, the appellant must take recourse to remedies available under criminal law.<\/p>\n

With respect to the Bar Council of Delhi, the Court noted that it is a statutory body entrusted with regulating the legal profession and taking disciplinary action for misconduct. However, the appellant had neither represented her grievance to the Bar Council nor impleaded it as a party.<\/p>\n

The Court reiterated the settled principle that “for seeking Writ of Mandamus, the person approaching the Court has to first approach the authorities concerned.”<\/span> The Court held that since the appellant had not approached the Bar Council of Delhi, no mandamus could be issued against it.<\/p>\n

Court’s Decision<\/h3>\n

The Court upheld the order of the Single Judge and dismissed the appeal, holding that the writ petition was not maintainable. However, the Court observed that it would always be open to the appellant to take recourse to appropriate civil or criminal action, including approaching the Bar Council of Delhi.<\/p>\n

[Sangita Rai<\/span> v. New Delhi Bar Association<\/span>, 2026 SCC OnLine Del 243<\/a>, Decided on 16-01-2026<\/span>]<\/p>\n

*Judgment by Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

Mr. Shishir Pinaki, Mr. Rakesh Singh and Mr. Shavnam Singh, Counsel for the Appellant<\/p>\n

Mr. Ashish Garg and Mr. Govidn Singh, Counsel for the Respondents<\/p>\n

Buy Constitution of India  HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"Constitution<\/a><\/p>\n

Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"Code<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“Bar Association is a body of private individual lawyers and in normal discharge of its functions, it does not perform any function which can be said to be a public function”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67514,"featured_media":373435,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[42285,12141,6351,67299,32667,2543,87202,31790,12471,7272,14591],"class_list":["post-373432","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-article-12","tag-article-226","tag-bar-association","tag-chief-justice-devendra-kumar-upadhyaya","tag-constitutional-law","tag-Delhi_High_Court","tag-justice-tejas-karia","tag-public-function","tag-societies-registration-act","tag-writ-jurisdiction","tag-writ-of-mandamus"],"yoast_head":"\nDel HC: Bar Association Not "State" Under Article 12 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Delhi High Court has held that a Bar Association is not "State" under Article 12 but a private body of lawyers and no writ of mandamus can be issued against it under Article 226.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bar Association Not 'State', No Writ of Mandamus maintainable for alleged trespass in Court Chamber: Delhi High Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Delhi High Court has held that a Bar Association is not "State" under Article 12 but a private body of lawyers and no writ of mandamus can be issued against it under Article 226.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-01-22T05:30:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-01-29T11:39:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Bar-Association-not-State.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"800\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"533\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Bar Association Not 'State', No Writ of Mandamus maintainable for alleged trespass in Court Chamber: Delhi High Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Ritu\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/\",\"name\":\"Del HC: Bar Association Not \\\"State\\\" Under Article 12 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Bar-Association-not-State.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-01-22T05:30:06+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-01-29T11:39:25+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\"},\"description\":\"Delhi High Court has held that a Bar Association is not \\\"State\\\" under Article 12 but a private body of lawyers and no writ of mandamus can be issued against it under Article 226.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Bar-Association-not-State.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Bar-Association-not-State.webp\",\"width\":800,\"height\":533,\"caption\":\"Bar Association not State\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bar Association Not ‘State’, No Writ of Mandamus maintainable for alleged trespass in Court Chamber: Delhi High Court\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9\",\"name\":\"Ritu\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Ritu\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Del HC: Bar Association Not \"State\" Under Article 12 | SCC Times","description":"Delhi High Court has held that a Bar Association is not \"State\" under Article 12 but a private body of lawyers and no writ of mandamus can be issued against it under Article 226.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bar Association Not 'State', No Writ of Mandamus maintainable for alleged trespass in Court Chamber: Delhi High Court","og_description":"Delhi High Court has held that a Bar Association is not \"State\" under Article 12 but a private body of lawyers and no writ of mandamus can be issued against it under Article 226.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2026-01-22T05:30:06+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-01-29T11:39:25+00:00","og_image":[{"width":800,"height":533,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Bar-Association-not-State.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Ritu","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"Bar Association Not 'State', No Writ of Mandamus maintainable for alleged trespass in Court Chamber: Delhi High Court","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Ritu","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/","name":"Del HC: Bar Association Not \"State\" Under Article 12 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Bar-Association-not-State.webp","datePublished":"2026-01-22T05:30:06+00:00","dateModified":"2026-01-29T11:39:25+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9"},"description":"Delhi High Court has held that a Bar Association is not \"State\" under Article 12 but a private body of lawyers and no writ of mandamus can be issued against it under Article 226.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Bar-Association-not-State.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Bar-Association-not-State.webp","width":800,"height":533,"caption":"Bar Association not State"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/01\/22\/del-hc-bar-association-not-state-article-12\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bar Association Not ‘State’, No Writ of Mandamus maintainable for alleged trespass in Court Chamber: Delhi High Court"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/392f265bae2f48f0f0d02b8e0e9015b9","name":"Ritu","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/c47318594774c1fe55e3e8c85dcd1909276373d9bf11730032fc1a7d05d56a47?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Ritu"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_7\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/Bar-Association-not-State.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":346927,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/01\/bar-associations-not-state-under-art-12-of-constitution-bom-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":373432,"position":0},"title":"Bar Associations not \u2018State\u2019 under Art. 12 of Constitution, hence writ petition under Art. 226 not maintainable against them: Bombay HC","author":"Simranjeet","date":"May 1, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"The bar associations are either societies registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, or trusts; are governed by their own byelaws or rules and there is no pervasive control of the Government or even of the Bar Council on the bar associations.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":379907,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/04\/01\/indian-olympic-association-cannot-control-functioning-of-an-independent-body-delhi-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":373432,"position":1},"title":"Sports bodies not registered as a National Sports Body are autonomous, can\u2019t be governed by any other statutory regime: Delhi HC","author":"Editor","date":"April 1, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"The Indian Olympic Association is not vested with any authority or power to appoint any ad hoc Committee in relation to the functions of an independent body or association.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Autonomy of the sports body to manage its functioning","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Autonomy-of-the-sports-body-to-manage-its-functioning.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Autonomy-of-the-sports-body-to-manage-its-functioning.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Autonomy-of-the-sports-body-to-manage-its-functioning.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/04\/Autonomy-of-the-sports-body-to-manage-its-functioning.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":379267,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/24\/del-hc-formulation-of-child-access-and-custody-guidelines\/","url_meta":{"origin":373432,"position":2},"title":"Delhi High Court directs Registrar General to consider formulation of Child Access and Custody Guidelines with Parenting Plan","author":"Ritu","date":"March 24, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"With similar frameworks already emerging in other states, the Delhi High Court begins evaluating whether formal child access and parenting plan guidelines are needed.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Child Access and Custody Guidelines","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Child-Access-and-Custody-Guidelines.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Child-Access-and-Custody-Guidelines.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Child-Access-and-Custody-Guidelines.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Child-Access-and-Custody-Guidelines.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":375363,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/02\/11\/del-hc-directives-on-lawyers-safety-court-security\/","url_meta":{"origin":373432,"position":3},"title":"Delhi HC issues protective directives for lawyers, including Round-the-Clock Security, Bar Council Inquiry, Court Security Arrangements, etc.","author":"Ritu","date":"February 11, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cLearned counsel, in unison, have expressed their concern about the reported incident and have categorically stated that such incident, if it had occurred, not only threatens security the individual lawyers practicing in the Courts, but also erodes the dignity and propriety of the proceedings of the Courts.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"directives on lawyers' safety","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/directives-on-lawyers-safety.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/directives-on-lawyers-safety.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/directives-on-lawyers-safety.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/directives-on-lawyers-safety.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":298410,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/08\/03\/know-thy-justice-devendra-kumar-upadhyaya-47th-chief-justice-of-bombay-hc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":373432,"position":4},"title":"Know Thy Judge| Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya: 47th Chief Justice of Bombay High Court","author":"Editor","date":"August 3, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya was appointed as Chief Justice of Bombay High Court on 24-07-2023.","rel":"","context":"In "Know thy Judge"","block_context":{"text":"Know thy Judge","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/judges-information\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"justice devendra kumar upadhyaya","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/justice-devendra-kumar-upadhyaya.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/justice-devendra-kumar-upadhyaya.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/justice-devendra-kumar-upadhyaya.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/justice-devendra-kumar-upadhyaya.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":339032,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/01\/14\/centre-transfers-justice-devendra-kumar-upadhyaya-as-delhi-high-court-chief-justice\/","url_meta":{"origin":373432,"position":5},"title":"Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya appointed as the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court","author":"Editor","date":"January 14, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Justice Upadhyaya was elevated as the Chief Justice of Bombay High Court on 29-07-2023. On 07-01-2025, the Supreme Court collegium recommended to transfer him as Chief Justice of Delhi High Court.","rel":"","context":"In "Appointments & Transfers"","block_context":{"text":"Appointments & Transfers","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/news\/appointments\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Justice-Devendra-Kumar-Upadhyaya.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Justice-Devendra-Kumar-Upadhyaya.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Justice-Devendra-Kumar-Upadhyaya.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/01\/Justice-Devendra-Kumar-Upadhyaya.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/373432","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67514"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=373432"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/373432\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":374083,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/373432\/revisions\/374083"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/373435"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=373432"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=373432"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=373432"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}