In the matter of D, an Advocate AIR 1956 SC 102

Vande Matram! A judgment is discussed in this article.

In the matter of D, an Advocate AIR 1956 SC 102

Court: Supreme Court of India.

Facts of the matter:

1) Adv. D was an enrolled advocate of Bombay High Court. And thus he was having the right to practice in any court of the Union of India.

2) He was prosecuted before the Presidency Magistrate of Bombay for the charge under the Bombay Prohibition Act. He was convicted by the Presidency Magistrate. Also Presidency Magistrate in his report regarding the conduct of Adv D as an advocate.

3) Adv D went up on appeal to the High Court.

4) High Court on the report of Presidency Magistrate constituted a Bar Council Tribunal of Three Members. This tribunal called an inquiry regarding the conduct of Adv D as an advocate.

5) Adv D made an application under Article 227 to High Court for quashing the proceedings conducted by the bar council tribunal for want of jurisdiction. Adv D pleaded that Tribunal had no jurisdiction to enter upon the inquiry of the misconduct complained of was not committed by him in his capacity as an Advocate. But this application was rejected by High Court.

6) Adv. D forwarded an unconditional apology letter. In that letter, he admitted that statements in the report of the Presidency Magistrate are correct except for two of them. Tribunal held that the mere conviction of the respondent under the Prohibition Act did not amount to professional or other misconduct under Section 10 of the Indian Bar Councils Act and, therefore, found him not guilty of the charge of professional misconduct with a recommendation to take notice of the conduct of Adv. D. And report of this inquiry was submitted to the Bombay High Court.

7) In the final hearing of the appeal at High Court took the view that the misconduct of the respondent was so serious and so grave that a deterrent punishment must be imposed on him. High Court convicted Adv D for his unworthy conduct as an advocate during proceedings in front of Presidency Magistrate and Bar Council Tribunal.

8) Adv. D appealed in Supreme Court for the judgment of the High Court regarding his conduct as an advocate. Adv D in his petition in Supreme Court pleaded that the Report of Presidency Magistrate is a highly exaggerated, garbled, and manifestly incorrect version of the incidents that occurred during the trial of the case.

Observations of the Supreme Court:

“It is needless for us to emphasise that a person holding the responsible position of an Advocate of a High Court and of this Court cannot be permitted to play with the Court in the way this Advocate has done. He admitted the correctness of the report, confessed his guilt, and tendered an unconditional apology evidently in the hope that he would get away with it by merely tendering an apology. Finding that the tactics did not work with the High Court as he expected the same to do, he now wants to charge his tactics by asking for an inquiry which he had himself avoided by means of his admission and apology.”

Further, the court observed that “The conduct of the respondent in the criminal trial was, as pointed out by the High Court, entirely indefensible by any standard. It discloses a continuous and persistent attempt on the part of the respondent to be rude to and contemptuous of the Magistrate, to hold up the trial, and to do everything in his power to bring the administration of justice into contempt. Such conduct, in our opinion, merits severe condemnation.”

Thus the professional misconduct of Adv D was proved, which was vague and unethical as an advocate.

Punishments:

Adv D was sentenced at all the levels of the case

a) Presidency Magistrate: One month of rigorous imprisonment with a fine.

b) Bar Council Tribunal: No punishment pronounced but recommended to notice the behavior of Adv D.

c) High Court: Suspension of practice in High Court for one year.

d) Supreme Court: Suspension of practice in all Courts throughout the Union of India for one year.

To know the references and to read more articles related to Professional ethics and professional accounting system please visit this page Legal Profession: Professional Ethics and Professional accounting system.

Thanks for reading till the end. Please share this with all legal professionals.

================