<p>Volume 10 covers Chapter V, Articles 214 to 231 &lsquo;The High Courts in the States&rsquo; and includes the recent judicial pronouncement to the challenge to and interpretation of Amendments in Articles 123, 124A, 124B and 124C, 127, 128, 217, 222, 224, 224A and 231 , brought about by the 99th Amendment, 2014. The important Judgements include the following: &bull; The Five Judges Bench of the Supreme Court upheld primacy of judiciary in appointment of Judges as integral to the independence of judiciary, which is a constituent part of basic structure of the Constitution, and held entire 99th Amendment to be ultra vires the basic structure and consequently the NJAC Act was also declared ultra vires on 16th October 2017. Supreme Court Advocate on Records Association vs Union of India, (2016) 5 SCC 1. &bull; Distinguishing the scope of Articles 226 and 227 overruling the ratio of Surya Dev Rai&rsquo;s case, AIR 2003 SC 3044, the Supreme Court in Radhey Shyam v Chabbi Nath (2015 ) held that the judicial orders passed by civil courts are not amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 . The challenge to such judicial orders could lie by way of statutory appeal or under Article 227. &bull; A convicted advocate can be barred from appearing/pleading before any court for an appropriate period, till he purges himself of the contempt even in the absence of termination/suspension of enrolment. Mahipal Singh Rana v State of UP, AIR 2016 SC 3302. &bull; Only a miniscule minority constitutes the LGBT community. In the absence of sufficient details and data Section 377 could not be struck down by High Court. Suresh Kumar Kaushal vs Naz Foundation, AIR 2014 SC 563. &bull; The extraordinary power of transfer of investigation from State police to CBI must be exercised sparingly, cautiously and in exceptional situations. K.V. Rajendran v Supt. of Police, 2013 (10) SCALE 513.</p>
