1/11/2017

PrintArticle:Professionalmisconductoflawyersinindia

Professionalmisconductoflawyersinindia

Source:http://www.legalserviceindia.com
Author:elbepeter
Publishedon:June06,2014

ProfessionalmisconductoflawyersinIndia

elbepeter'sProfileand
details

Advocacyisanobleprofessionandanadvocateisthemostaccountable,privilegedanderuditepersonof
DrElbe

thesocietyandhisactarerolemodelforthesociety,whicharenecessarytoberegulated.Professional
Peter,MDS,
misconductisthebehaviouroutsidetheboundsofwhatisconsideredacceptableorworthyofits
LL.B,DCR.
membershipbythegoverningbodyofaprofession.Professionalmisconductreferstodisgracefulor
orthodontist
dishonourableconductnotbefittinganadvocat.ChapterVoftheAdvocateAct,1961,dealswiththe
kerala
conductofAdvocates.Itdescribesprovisionsrelatingtopunishmentforprofessionalandother
misconducts.Section35(1)oftheAdvocateAct,1961,says,whereonreceiptofacomplaintorotherwiseaStateBarCouncilhas
reasontobelievethatanyadvocateonitsrollhasbeenguiltyofprofessionalorothermisconduct,itshallreferthecasefordisposaltoit
disciplinarycommittee.Generallylegalprofessionisnotatradeorbusiness,itsagracious,noble,anddecontaminatedprofessionofthe
society.Membersbelongingtothisprofessionshouldnotencouragedeceitfulnessandcorruption,buttheyhavetostrivetosecure
justicetotheirclients.Thecredibilityandreputationoftheprofessiondependsuponthemannerinwhichthemembersoftheprofession
conductthemselves.ItsasymbolofhealthyrelationshipbetweenBarandBench.
TheAdvocatesAct,1961aswellIndianBarCouncilaresilentinprovidingexactdefinitionforprofessionalmisconductbecauseofits
widescope,thoughunderAdvocatesAct,1961totakedisciplinaryactionpunishmentsareprescribedwhenthecredibilityand
reputationontheprofessioncomesunderacloutonaccountofactsofomissionandcommissionbyanymemberoftheprofession.
MeaningandDefinition
Professionisavocationrequiringsomesignificantbodyofknowledgethatisappliedwithhighdegreeofconsistencyintheserviceof
somerelevantsegmentofsociety,byHodgeandJohnson.Occupationespeciallyonerequiringadvancededucationandspecialtraining
byA.S.Hornby.Itisdifferentfromothertypesofjobs,inthesensethatitrequiresskillsandtheseskillswillbeimprovedwith
experience.
TheattributesofaprofessionaslaiddownbyDaltonE.McFarlandare
1)Theexistenceofabodyofspecializedknowledgeortechniques
2)Formalizedmethodofacquiringtrainingandexperience
3)Theestablishmentofrepresentativeorganizationwithprofessionalismasitsgoal.
4)Theformationofethicalcodesfortheguidanceofconduct.
5)Thechargingoffeesbasedonservicesbutwithdueregardsforthepriorityofserviceoverthedesireformonetaryrewards.
Apersonwhocarries/undertakestheprofessioniscalledaprofessional.Dependingontheprofessionapersonundertakes,he/sheis
identifiedwithaspecialnamerelevanttotheprofession.
Misconduct,accordingtoOxforddictionarymeansawrongful,improper,orunlawfulconductmotivatedbypremeditatedact.Itisa
behaviornotconformingtoprevailingstandardsorlaws,ordishonestorbadmanagement,especiallybypersonsentrustedorengagedto
actonanother'sbehalf.Theexpressionprofessionalmisconductinthesimplesensemeansimproperconduct.Inlawprofession
misconductmeansanactdonewillfullywithawrongintentionbythepeopleengagedintheprofession.Itmeansanyactivityor
behaviourofanadvocateinviolationofprofessionalethicsforhisselfishends.Ifanactcreatesdisrespecttohisprofessionandmakes
himunworthyofbeingintheprofession,itamountstoprofessionalmisconduct.Inotherwordanactwhichdisqualifiesanadvocateto
continueinlegalprofession.
Tounderstandthescopeandimplicationofthetermmisconduct,thecontextoftheroleandresponsibilityofanadvocateshouldbe
keptinmind.Misconductisasufficientlywideexpression,andneednotnecessarilyimplytheinvolvementofmoralturpitude.
MisconductpersehasbeendefinedintheBlacksLawDictionarytobeanytransgressionofsomeestablishedanddefiniteruleof
action,aforbiddenact,unlawfulorimproperbehavior,willfulincharacter,aderelictionofduty.Inadifferentcontext,theSupreme
Courthasopinedthatthewordmisconducthasnoprecisemeaning,anditsscopeandambithastobeconstruedwithreferencetothe
subjectmatterandcontextwhereinthetermoccurs.Inthecontextofmisconductofanadvocate,anyconductthatinanywayrendersan
advocateunfitfortheexerciseofhisprofession,orislikelytohamperorembarrasstheadministrationofjusticemaybeconsideredto
amounttomisconduct,forwhichdisciplinaryactionmaybeinitiated.
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/print.php?art_id=1665

1/10

1/11/2017

PrintArticle:Professionalmisconductoflawyersinindia

amounttomisconduct,forwhichdisciplinaryactionmaybeinitiated.

DarlingJ,definedtheexpressionprofessionalmisconductin,InreASolicitorexpartethelawsocietyas,Itisshownthattheadvoatein
thepursuitofhisprofessionhasdonesomethingwithregardtoitwhichwouldbereasonablyregardedasdisgracefulordishonourable
byhisprofessionalbrethrenofgoodreputeandcompeteny,thenitisopentosaythatheisguiltyofprofessionalmisconduct.

Misconductissufficientlycomprehensivetoincludemisfeasanceaswellasmalfeasanceandisappliedtotheprofessionalpeople,it
includeunprofessionalactseventhoughtheyarenotinherentlywrongful.Theprofessionalmisconductmayconsistthefactinany
conduct,whichtendstobringreproachonthelegalprofessionortoalienatethefavourableopinionwhichthepublicshouldentertain
concerningit.InstateofPunjabvRamSinghthesupremeCourtheldthatthetermmisconductmayinvolvemoralturpitude,itmustbe
improperorwrongbehaviour,unlawfulbehaviour,willfulincharacter,aforbiddenact,atransgressionofestablishedanddefiniterule
ofactionorcodeofconduct,butnotmereerrorofjudgement,carelessnessornegligenceinperformanceofduty.

TheSupremeCourthas,insomeofitsdecisions,elucidatedontheconceptofmisconduct,anditsapplication.InSambhuRam
Yadavv.HanumanDasKhatry,acomplaintwasfiledbytheappellantagainstanadvocatetotheBarCouncilofRajasthan,thatwhile
appearinginasuitasacounsel,hewrotealetterstatingthattheconcernedjudge,beforewhomthesuitispendingacceptsbribes,and
askedforRs.10,000tobribeandinfluencethejudgetoobtainafavourableorder.TheDisciplinaryCommittee,holdingthatthe
advocatewasguiltyifmisconduct,statedthatsuchanactmadetheadvocatetotallyunfittobealawyer.TheSupremeCourt,
upholdingthefindingoftheRajasthanBarCouncilheldthatthelegalprofessionisnotatradeorbusiness.Membersbelongingtothe
professionhaveaparticulardutytoupholdtheintegrityoftheprofessionandtodiscouragecorruptioninordertoensurethatjusticeis
securedinalegalmanner.Theactoftheadvocatewasmisconductofthehighestdegreeasitnotonlyobstructedtheadministrationof
justice,buterodedthereputationoftheprofessionintheopinionofthepublic.

Inanothercase,NoratanmanCourasiav.M.R.MuralitheSupremeCourtexploredtheamplitudeandextentofthewords
professionalmisconductinSection35oftheAdvocatesAct.Thefactsofthecaseinvolvedanadvocate(appearingasalitigantinthe
capacityoftherespondent,andnotanadvocateinarentcontrolproceeding)assaultedandkickedthecomplainantandaskedhimto
refrainfromproceedingwiththecase.Themainissueinthiscasewaswhethertheactoftheadvocateamountedtomisconduct,the
actionagainstwhichcouldbeinitiatedintheBarCouncil,eventhoughhewasnotactinginthecapacityofanadvocate.Itwasupheld
bytheSupremeCourtthatalawyerisobligedtoobservethenormsofbehaviorexpectedofhim,whichmakehimworthyofthe
confidenceofthecommunityinhimasanofficeroftheCourt.Therefore,inspiteofthefactthathewasnotactinginhiscapacityasan
advocate,hisbehaviorwasunfitforanadvocate,andtheBarCouncilwasjustifiedinproceedingwiththedisciplinaryproceedings
againsthim.

Itmaybenotedthatinarrivingatthedecisioninthecase,theSupremeCourtcarriedoutanoverviewofthejurisprudenceofthecourts
intheareaofmisconductofadvocates.Itreiteratedthatthetermmisconductisincapableofaprecisedefinition.Broadlyspeaking,it
envisagesanyinstanceofbreachofdiscipline.Itmeansimproperbehavior,intentionalwrongdoingordeliberateviolationofaruleof
standardofbehavior.Thetermmayalsoincludewrongfulintention,whichisnotamereerrorofjudgment.Therefore,misconduct,
thoughincapableofaprecisedefinition,acquiresitsconnotationfromthecontext,thedelinquencyinitsperformanceanditseffecton
thedisciplineandthenatureofduty.

InN.G.Dastanev.ShrikantS.Shind,wheretheadvocateofoneofthepartieswasaskingforcontinuousadjournmentstothe
immenseinconvenienceoftheoppositeparty,itwasheldbytheSupremeCourtthatseekingadjournmentsforpostponingthe
examinationofwitnesseswhowerepresentwithoutmakingotherarrangementsforexaminingsuchwitnessesisaderelictionoftheduty
thatanadvocateowedtotheCourt,amountingtomisconduct.

Ultimately,asithasbeenupheldandreiteratedthatmisconductwouldcoveranyactivityorconductwhichhisprofessionalbrethren
ofgoodreputeandcompetencywouldreasonablyregardasdisgracefulordishonourable.Itmaybenotedthatthescopeof
misconductisnotrestrictedbytechnicalinterpretationsofrulesofconduct.ThiswasprovenconclusivelyinthecaseofBarCouncil
ofMaharashtrav.M.V.Dahbolkar.Thefactsunderconsiderationinvolvedadvocatespositioningthemselvesattheentrancetothe
Magistratescourtsandrushingtowardspotentiallitigants,oftenleadingtoanuglyscrimmagetosnatchbriefsandundercuttingoffees.
TheDisciplinaryCommitteeofthestateBarCouncilfoundsuchbehaviortoamounttoprofessionalmisconduct,butonappealtothe
BarCouncilofIndia,itwastheBarCouncilofIndiaabsolvedthemofallchargesofprofessionalmisconductonthegroundthatthe
conductdidnotcontraveneRule36oftheStandardsofProfessionalConductandEtiquetteastherulerequiredsolicitationofworkfrom
aparticularpersonwithrespecttoaparticularcase,andthiscasedidnotmeetallthenecessarycriteria,andsuchmethodofsolicitation
couldnotamounttomisconduct.ThisapproachoftheBarcouncilofIndiawasheavilyreprimandedbytheSupremeCourt.Itwasheld
thatrestrictiveinterpretationoftherelevantrulebysplittingupthetextdoesnotimplythattheconductoftheadvocateswaswarranted
orjustified.Thestandardofconductofadvocatesflowsfromthebroadcannonsofethicsandhightomeofbehavior.Itwasheldthat
professionalethicscannotbecontainedinaBarCouncilrulenorintraditionalcantinthebooksbutinnewcanonsofconscience
whichwillcommandthememberofthecallingofjusticetoobeyrulesormoralityandutility.Misconductofadvocatesshouldthusbe
understoodinacontextspecific,dynamicsense,whichcapturestheroleoftheadvocateinthesocietyatlarge.

ProvisionsinAdvocatesact1961

Theadvocatesact1961isacomprehensivelegislationthatregulatesthelegalpracticeandlegaleducationinIndia.Itenvisagesforthe
establishmentofBarCouncilofIndiaandStateBarCouncilswithvariousdisciplinarycommitteestodealwithmisconductofthe
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/print.php?art_id=1665

2/10

1/11/2017

PrintArticle:Professionalmisconductoflawyersinindia

advocates.Italsoprovidesfortheprovisionsrelatingtotheadmissionandenrolmentofadvocatesandadvocatesrighttopractice.
ChapterVcontainingsections35to44dealswiththeconductoftheadvocates.Itprovidesforpunishmentforadvocatesfor
professionalandothermisconductanddisciplinarypowersoftheBarcouncilofIndia.Inordertoattracttheapplicationofsection35of
theadvocatesactthemisconductneednotbeprofessionalmisconductalone.TheexpressionusedinthesectionisProfessionalorother
misconduct.Soevenconductunconnectedwiththeprofessionmayaccounttoamisconductasforexample,convictionforacrime,
thoughthecrimewasnotcommitedintheprofessionalcapacity.Atthesametimeitistobenotedthatamereconvictionisnot
sufficienttofindanadvocateguiltyofmisconduct,thecourtmustlookintothenatureoftheactonwhichtheconvictionisbasedto
decidewhethertheadvocateisorisnotanunfitpersontoberemovedfromortobeallowedtoremainintheprofession.

Misconductisofinfinitevariety,theexpressionprofessionalorothermisconductmustbeunderstoodintheirplainandnaturalmeaning
andthereisnojustificationinrestrictingtheirnaturalmeaning.Thetermmisconductusuallyimpliesanactdonewillfullywithawrong
intentionandasappliedtoprofessionalpeopleitincludesunprofessionalactseventhoughsuchactsarenotinherentlywrongful.

TheCodeofConductPrescribedForAdvocate

Section49oftheadvocatesact1961empowerstheBarCouncilofIndiatoframerulesregulatingstandardsofprofessionalconduct.
Accordinglyvariousdutiesareprescribedfortheadvocatessomeofthemarehighlightedbelow.

Noadvertisingorsolicitingwork,itisagainstanadvocatescodeofethicstosolicitoradvertiseworkandamountstoamisconducton
thepartoftheadvocate.Bothdirectandindirectadvertisingisprohibited.Anadvocatemaynotadvertisehisservicesthroughcirculars,
advertisements,touts,personalcommunicationorinterviewsnotwarrantedbypersonalrelations.Similarly,thefollowingformsof
indirectadvertisingareprohibited:

(i)byissuingcircularsorelectionmanifestosbyalawyerwithhisname,professionandaddressprintedonthemanifestos,thereby
appealingtothemembersoftheprofessionpractisinginthelowercourtswhoareinapositiontorecommendclientstocounsel
practisingintheHC.

(ii)canvassingforvotesbytouringintheprovinceorsendingouthisclerkoragentstothevariousdistricts,whichmustnecessarily
meandirectlyapproachingadvocatespracticinginsubordinatecourts.Further,thesignboardornameplatedisplayedbyanadvocate
shouldbeofreasonablesize.Itshouldnotrefertodetailsofanaffiliatedbytheadvocatei.e.thatheisorhasbeenpresidentormember
ofabarcouncilorofanyassociation,orhehasbeenaJudgeoranAdvocateGeneral,orthathespecializesinaparticularkindofwork,
orthatheisorwasassociatedwithanypersonororganizationorwithanyparticularcauseormatter.

NottodemandfeesfortrainingAnadvocateisrestrainedfromdemandinganyfeesforimpartingtrainingtoenableanypersonto
qualifyforenrolment.

Notusename/servicesforunauthorizedpracticeAnadvocatemaynotallowhisprofessionalservicesorhisnametobeassociatedwith,
orbeusedforanyunauthorizedpracticeoflawbyanylayagency.
Nottoenterappearancewithoutconsentoftheadvocatealreadyengaged:anadvocateisprohibitedfromenteringappearanceinacase
wherethereisalreadyanotheradvocateengagedforapartyexceptwiththeconsentofsuchadvocate.Howeverifsuchconsentisnot
produced,theadvocatemuststatethereasonsfornotproducingit,andmayappearsubsequently,onlywiththepermissionofthecourt.

Dutytooppositeparty:Whileconductingacase,alawyerhasadutytobefairnotonlytohisclientbutalsotothecourt,andtothe
oppositeparty.Anadvocateforapartymustcommunicateornegotiatewiththeotherpartiesregardingthesubjectmatterof
controversy,onlythroughtheoppositepartysadvocate.Ifanadvocatehasmadeanylegitimatepromisestotheoppositeparty,he
shouldfulfillthesame,evenifthepromisewasnotreducedtowritingorenforceableundertherulesofthecourt.

Dutiesofanadvocatetowardshisclient:Therelationshipbetweenalawyerandaclientishighlyfiduciaryanditisthedutyofan
advocatefearlesslytoupholdtheinterestsoftheclientbyfairandhonourablemeanswithoutregardtoanyunpleasantconsequencesto
himselforanyotherperson.

TheaboveareonlyfewimportantcodeofconducttobeobservedbyanadvocatepracticinginIndia.AccordingtoJusticeAbbotParry,
therearesevenimportantqualitiesthatalawyershouldpossess,hecallthesequalitiesassevenlampsofadvocacy,theyareHonesty,
Courage,Industry,Wit,eloquence,Judgement,andFellowship.ApartfromthatthepanchsheelofthebarareHonesty,Industry,Justice,
ServiceandPhilisophyandPanchsheelofthebenchaccordingtoSriramKishoreRandeare,Impartiality,Independence,Integrityand
Industry,JudicialactivismandPrayer.Amongthevariousdutiesoftheadvocateslike,dutiestoclient,court,public,colleaguesandself,
selectedpointscanbepickedupandarrangedaccordingtothedueandrelativeimportanceandarecalledastencommandmentsof
advocatestheyare

a)Dutiestoclient

1)Protectionoftheinterestoftheclient

2)Properestimationofthevalueoflegaladvicesandservices

b)Dutiestocourt

3)Honestyandrespect
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/print.php?art_id=1665
3/10

1/11/2017

PrintArticle:Professionalmisconductoflawyersinindia

3)Honestyandrespect

4)Preparationofthecase

c)DutiestoPublic

5)Service

6)Loyaltytolawandjustice

d)Dutiestocolleagues

7)Fellowship

8)Fairness

e)Dutiestoself

9)Systematicstudy

10)Prudenceanddeligence

TheruleslaiddownbytheBarCouncilofIndiaformsthecodeofconductforadvocatesandinbroadsenseanyviolationofsuchrules
orcodeofconductcanbetermedasprofessionalmisconduct.ThescopeofthetermhasbeenstillwidenedbytheSupremeCourtin
variousdecisions.

InstancesofMisconduct

LegalPractionersact1879hasnotdefinedthewordMisconduct.ThewordUnprofessionalconductisusedintheact.Eventhe
AdvocatesAct1961hasnotdefinedthetermmisconductbecauseofthewidescopeandapplicationoftheterm.Hencetounderstand
theinstancesofmisconductwehavetorelyondecidedcases.SomeoftheinstancesofProfessionalmisconductareasfollows,
1)Derelictionofduty

2)Professionalnegligence

3)Misappropriation

4)Changingsides

5)Contemptofcourtandimproperbehaviourbeforeamagistrate

6)Furnishingfalseinformation

7)Givingimproperadvice

8)Misleadingtheclientsincourt

9)Nonspeakingthetruth

10)Disowningallegiancetocourt

11)Movingapplicationwithoutinformingthatasimilarapplicationhasbeenrejectedbyanotherauthority

12)Suggestingtobribethecourtofficials

13)Forcingtheprocecutionwitnessnottotellthetruth.

ContemptofCourtAsMisconduct

IntherecentcaseofB.M.Vermav.UttrakhandRegulatoryCommissioncourtnotedthat,itwasgiventhewidepowersavailablewitha
Courtexercisingcontemptjurisdiction.InthecaseofCourtofItsOwnMotionv.Statedealingwiththecontemptproceedingsinvolving
twosenioradvocates,observedthatgiventhewidepowersavailablewithaCourtexercisingcontemptjurisdiction,itcannotaffordto
behypersensitiveandtherefore,atrivialmisdemeanorwouldnotwarrantcontemptaction.Circumspectionisallthemorenecessary
becauseasobservedbytheSCinSCBarAssociationv.UnionofIndiatheCourtisineffectthejury,thejudgeandthehangmanwhile
inM.R.ParasharH.L.SehgalitwasobservedthattheCourtisalsoaprosecutorAnilKumarSarkarv.HirakGhosh,reiteratesthis.

InthemostcontroversialandleadingcaseofR.K.Ananadv.RegistrarofDelhiHighCourt,On30thMay,2007aTVnewschannel
NDTVcarriedareportrelatingtoastingoperation.ThereportconcerneditselfwiththeroleofadefencelawyerandtheSpecialPublic
ProsecutorinanongoingSessionstrialinwhatiscommonlycalledtheBMWcase.On31stMay,2007aDivisionBenchofthisCourt,
onitsownmotion,registeredawritPetitionandissuedadirectiontotheRegistrarGeneraltocollectallmaterialsthatmaybeavailable
inrespectofthetelecastandalsodirectedNDTVtopreservetheoriginalmaterialincludingtheCD/videopertainingtothesting
operation.ThequestionforourconsiderationiswhetherMr.R.K.AnandandMr.I.U.Khan,SeniorAdvocatesandMr.SriBhagwan
Sharma,AdvocatehavecommittedcriminalcontemptofCourtornot.Itwasobservedthatprimafacietheiractsandconductwere
intendedtosubverttheadministrationofjusticeinthependingBMWcaseandinparticulartoinfluencetheoutcomeofthepending
judicialproceedings.Accordingly,inexerciseofpowersconferredbyArticle215oftheConstitutionproceedingsforcontemptofCourt
(asdefinedinSection2(c)oftheContemptofCourtsAct,1971)wereinitiatedagainstMr.Anand,Mr.KhanandMr.SriBhagwan
Sharmaandtheywereaskedtoshowcausewhytheyshouldnotbepunishedaccordingly.CourtsaidthatCourtsoflawarestructuredin
suchadesignastoevokerespectandreverenceforthemajestyoflawandjustice.Themachineryfordispensationofjusticeaccording
tolawisoperatedbythecourt.Proceedingsinsidethecourtsarealwaysexpectedtobeheldinadignifiedandorderlymanner.Thevery
sightofanadvocate,whowasfoundguiltyofcontemptofcourtontheprevioushour,standinginthecourtandarguingacaseorcross
examiningawitnessonthesameday,unaffectedbythecontemptuousbehaviourhehurledatthecourt,woulderodethedignityofthe
courtandevencorrodethemajestyofitbesidesimpairingtheconfidenceofthepublicintheefficacyoftheinstitutionofthecourts.
ThisnecessitatesvestingofpowerwiththeHCtoformulaterulesforregulatingtheproceedingsinsidethecourtincludingtheconduct
ofadvocatesduringsuchproceedings.Thatpowershouldnotbeconfusedwiththerighttopractiselaw.Thuscourtheldthattheremay
bewaysinwhichconductandactionsofanadvocatemayposearealandimminentthreattothepurityofcourtproceedingscardinalto
anycourtsfunctioning,apartfromconstitutingasubstantiveoffenceandcontemptofcourtandprofessionalmisconduct.Insucha
situationthecourtdoesnotonlyhavetherightbutalsotheobligationtoprotectitself.Hence,tothatenditcanbartheadvocatefrom
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/print.php?art_id=1665

4/10

1/11/2017

PrintArticle:Professionalmisconductoflawyersinindia

appearingbeforethecourtsforanappropriateperiodoftime.Inthepresentcasesincethecontentsofthestingrecordingswereadmitted
andtherewasnoneedfortheproofofintegrityandcorrectnessoftheelectronicmaterials.FinallytheSupremeCourtupheldHigh
CourtsverdictmakingAnandguiltyonthesamecount.Ontheotherhand,theSupremeCourtletoffIUKhan,whowasfoundguilty
bytheHighCourt.

AttemptofMurder:

InthecaseofHikmatAlikhanv.Ishwarprasadaryaandors,IshwarPrasadArya,respondentNo.1,wasregisteredasanadvocatewith
theBarCouncilofUttarPradeshandwaspractisingatBadaun.AnincidenttookplaceonMay18,1971duringlunchintervalatabout
1.55p.m.,inwhichrespondentNo.1assaultedhisopponentRadheyShyamintheCourtroomofMunsif/Magistrate,BisauliatBadaun
withaknife.Apistolshotisalsosaidtohavebeenfiredbyhimatthetimeofincident.Afterinvestigationhewasprosecutedfor
offencesunderSection307oftheIndianPenalCodeandSection25oftheArmsAct.The1stTemporaryCivilandSessionsJudge,by
hisjudgmentdatedJuly3,1972,convictedhimofthesaidoffenceandsentencedhimtoundergorigorousimprisonmentforthreeyears
fortheoffenceunderSection307,I.P.C.andforaperiodofninemonthsforoffenceunderSection25oftheArmsAct.

OnthebasisofthesaidcomplaintdisciplinaryproceedingswereinitiatedagainstrespondentNo.1bytheBarCouncilofU.P.hewas
foundguiltyofgrossprofessionalmisconductbytakingthebenefithimselfofaforgedandfabricateddocumentwhichhadbeen
preparedathisbehest.TheDisciplinaryCommitteeoftheBarCouncilofU.P.directedthatrespondentNo.1bedebarredfrom
practisingasanadvocateforaperiodoftwoyearsfromthedateoftheserviceoftheorder.RespondentNo.1filedanappeal,thesaid
appealwasallowedbytheDisciplinaryCommitteeoftheBarCouncilofIndiabyorderdatedJune8,1984andtheorderofthe
DisciplinaryCommitteeoftheBarCouncilofU.P.datedJanuary30,1982wassetasideontheviewthattherewasnomaterialonthe
basisofwhichitcouldreasonablybeheldthatrespondentNo.1hadpreparedthedocumentwhichwassubsequentlyfoundforged.
FurtherthesubmissionofShriMarkendayawasthathavingregardtothegravityofthemisconductofrespondentNo.1inassaultinghis
opponentintheCourtroomwithaknifeandhishavingbeencommittedtheoffenceunderSection307,I.P.C.andhisbeingsentencedto
undergorigorousimprisonmentforthreeyearsinconnectionwiththesaidincident,thepunishmentofremovalofthenameof
respondentNo.1fromtherollofadvocatesshouldhavebeenimposedonhimandthattheDisciplinaryCommitteeoftheBarCouncil
ofU.P.wasinerrorinimposingthelightpunishmentofdebarringrespondentNo.1frompractisingasanadvocateforaperiodofthree
yearsonlyandthatthiswasafitcaseinwhichtheappealfiledbytheappellantshouldhavebeenallowedbytheDisciplinary
CommitteeoftheBarCouncilofIndia.Itwasheldthattheactsofmisconductfoundestablishedareseriousinnature.UnderSub
section(3)ofSection35oftheActtheDisciplinaryCommitteeoftheStateBarCouncilisempoweredtopassanorderimposing
punishmentonanadvocatefoundguiltyofprofessionalorothermisconduct.Suchpunishmentcanbereprimand[Clause(b)],
suspensionfrompracticeforacertainperiod[Clause(c)]andremovalofthenameoftheadvocatefromtheStaterollofadvocate
[Clause(d)],dependingonthegravityofthemisconductfoundestablished.Thepunishmentofremovalofthenamefromtherollof
advocatesiscalledforwherethemisconductissuchastoshowthattheadvocateisunworthyofremainingintheprofession.Inthis
context,itmaybepointedoutthatunderSection24(A)oftheActapersonwhoisconvictedofanoffenceinvolvingmoralturpitudeis
disqualifiedforbeingadmittedasanadvocateontheStaterollofadvocates.Thismeansthattheconductinvolvingconvictionofan
offenceinvolvingmoralturpitudewhichwoulddisqualifyapersonfrombeingenrolledasanadvocatehastobeconsideredaserious
misconductwhenfoundtohavebeencommittedbyapersonwhoisenrolledasanadvocateanditwouldcallfortheimpositionofthe
punishmentofremovalofthenameoftheadvocatefromtherollofadvocates.IntheinstantcaserespondentNo.1hasbeenconvicted
oftheoffenceofattemptingtocommitmurderpunishableunderSection307,IPC.HehadassaultedhisopponentintheCourtroom
withaknife.Thegravityofthemisconductcommittedbyhimissuchastoshowthatheisunworthyofremainingintheprofession.
Thesaidmisconduct,therefore,calledfortheimpositionofthepunishmentofremovalofthenameofrespondentNo.1fromtheState
rollofadvocatesandtheDisciplinaryCommitteeoftheBarCouncilofU.P.,inpassingthepunishmentofdebarringrespondentNo.1
frompractisingforaperiodofthreeyears,hasfailedtotakenoteofgravityofthemisconductcommittedbyrespondentNo.1.Having
regardtothefactsofthecasetheproperpunishmenttobeimposedonrespondentNo.1underSection35oftheActshouldhavebeento
directtheremovalofhisnamefromtheStaterollofadvocates.Theappealfiledbytheappellant,therefore,deservestobeallowed.
Finallycourtheldthattherespondentsnameshouldberemovedfromtherolls.

MisbehaviourAsMisconduct

Vinaychandramishra,inreInthiscaseasenioradvocateinonbeingaskedaquestioninthecourtstartedtoshoutatthejudgeandsaid
thatnoquestioncouldhavebeenputtohim.Hethreatenedtogetthejudgetransferredorseethatimpeachmentmotionisbrought
againsthiminParliament.HefurthersaidthathehasturnedupmanyJudgesandcreatedagoodsceneintheCourt.Heaskedthejudge
tofollowthepracticeofthisCourt.Hewantedtoconveythatadmissionisasacourseandnoargumentsareheard,atthisstage.Butthis
actwasnotonlythequestionofinsultingofaJudgeofthisinstitutionbutitisamatterofinstitutionasawhole.Incasedignityof
Judiciaryisnotbeingmaintainedthenwherethisinstitutionwillstand.Theconcernedjudgewrotealetterinformingtheincidenttothe
chiefjusticeofIndia.Ashowcausenoticewasissuedtohim.

Whethertheadvocatehadcommittedaprofessionalmisconduct?IsheguiltyoftheoffenceofthecriminalcontemptoftheCourtfor
havinginterferedwithandobstructedthecourseofjusticebytryingtothreaten,overaweandoverbeartheCourtbyusinginsulting,
disrespectfulandthreateninglanguage,andconvicthimofthesaidoffence.SincethecontemnerisaseniormemberoftheBarandalso
adornsthehighofficessuchasthoseoftheChairmanoftheBarCouncilofIndia,thePresidentoftheU.P.HCBarAssociation,
Allahabadandothers,hisconductisboundtoinfectthemembersoftheBaralloverthecountry.Weare,therefore,oftheviewthatan
exemplarypunishmenthastobemetedouttohim.ThusthecontemnerVinayChandraMishraisherebysentencedtoundergosimple
imprisonmentforaperiodofsixweeksandheshallstandsuspendedfrompractisingasanadvocateforaperiodofthreeyears.

StrikeAsMisconduct
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/print.php?art_id=1665

5/10

1/11/2017

PrintArticle:Professionalmisconductoflawyersinindia

StrikeAsMisconduct

Excapt.HarishuppalV.UnionofIndia,SeveralPetitionsraisethequestionwhetherlawyershavearighttostrikeand/orgiveacallfor
boycottsofCourt/s.Thepetitionerssubmittedthatstrikeasameanforcollectivebargainingisrecognisedonlyinindustrialdisputes.He
submittedthatlawyerswhoareofficersoftheCourtcannotusestrikesasameanstoblackmailtheCourtsortheclients.Hesubmitted
thattheCourtsmusttakeactionagainsttheCommitteemembersforgivingsuchcallsonthebasisthattheyhavecommittedcontemptof
court.HesubmittedthatthelawisthatalawyerwhohasacceptedaVakalatonbehalfofaclientmustattendCourtandifhedoesnot
attendCourtitwouldamounttoprofessionalmisconductandalsocontemptofcourt.HesubmittedthatCourtshouldnowframerules
wherebytheCourtsregulatetherightoflawyerstoappearbeforetheCourt.HesubmittedthatCourtsshouldframeruleswherebyany
lawyerwhomisconductshimselfandcommitscontemptofcourtbygoingonstrikeorboycottingaCourtwillnotbeallowedto
practiceinthatCourt.Hefurthersubmittedthatabstentionfromworkfortheredressalofagrievanceshouldneverberesortedtowhere
otherremediesforseekingredressalareavailable.Hesubmittedthatallattemptsshouldbemadetoseekredressalfromtheconcerned
authorities.Hesubmittedthatwheresuchredressalisnotavailableornotforthcoming,thedirectionoftheprotestcanbeagainstthat
authorityandshouldnotbemisdirected,e.g.,incasesofallegedpolicebrutalitiesCourtsandlitigantsshouldnotbetargetedinrespect
ofactionsforwhichtheyareinnowayresponsible.Heagreedthatnoforceorcoercionshouldbeemployedagainstlawyerswhoare
notinagreementwiththestrikecallandwanttodischargetheirprofessionalduties.Respondentsubmittedthatlawyershadarightto
goonstrikeorgiveacallforboycott.Hefurthersubmittedthattherearemanyoccasionswhenlawyersrequiretogo,onstrikeorgave
acallforboycott.HesubmittedthatthisCourtlayingdownthatgoingonstrikeamountstomisconductisofnoconsequenceastheBar
CouncilshavebeenvestedwiththepowertodecidewhetherornotanAdvocatehascommittedmisconduct.Hesubmittedthatthis
CourtcannotpenaliseanyAdvocateformisconductasthepowertodisciplineisnowexclusivelywiththeBarCouncils.Hesubmitted
thatitisfortheBarCouncilstodecidewhetherstrikeshouldberesortedtoornot.PetitionerfurtherreliedonthecaseofLt.Col.S.J.
Chaudharyv.State(DelhiAdministration,theHChaddirectedthatacriminaltrialgoonfromdaytoday.BeforethisCourtitwas
urgedthattheAdvocateswerenotwillingtoattenddaytodayasthetrialwaslikelytobeprolonged.Itwasheldthatitisthedutyof
everyadvocatewhoacceptsabriefinacriminalcasetoattendthetrialdaytoday.Itwasheldthatalawyerwouldbecommitting
breachofprofessionaldutiesifhefailstosoattend.InthecaseofK.JohnKoshyandOrs.v.Dr.TarakeshwarPrasadShaw,oneofthe
questionswaswhethertheCourtshouldrefusetohearamatterandpassanOrderwhencounselforboththesideswereabsentbecause
ofastrikecallbytheBarAssociation.ThisCourtheldthattheCourtcouldnotrefusetohearthematterasotherwiseitwould
tantamounttoCourtbecomingaprivytothestrike.Consideringthesanctityofthelegalprofessionthecourthadreliedonwordssaidin
caseofInIndianCouncilofLegalAidandAdvicev.BarCouncilofIndia,theSCobservedthus:Itisgenerallybelievedthat
membersofthelegalprofessionhavecertainsocialobligations,e.g.,torenderprobonopublicoservicetothepoorandthe
underprivileged.Sincethedutyofalawyeristoassistthecourtintheadministrationofjustice,thepracticeoflawhasapublicutility
flavourand,therefor,anadvocatemuststrictlyandscrupulouslyabidebytheCodeofConductbehovingthenobleprofessionandmust
notindulgeinanyactivitywhichmaytendtolowertheimageoftheprofessioninsociety.ThatiswhythefunctionsoftheBarCouncil
includethelayingdownofstandardsofprofessionalconductandetiquettewhichadvocatesmustfollowtomaintainthedignityand
purityoftheprofession.InRe:SanjeevDatta,theSChasstatedthus:Thelegalprofessionisasolemnandseriousoccupation.Itisa
noblecallingandallthosewhobelongtoitareitshonourablemembers.Althoughtheentrytotheprofessioncanbehadbyacquiring
merelythequalificationoftechnicalcompetence,thehonourasaprofessionalhastobemaintainedbyitsmembersbytheirexemplary
conductbothinandoutsidetheCourt.Thelegalprofessionisdifferentfromotherprofessionsinthatwhatthelawyersdo,affectsnot
onlyanindividualbuttheadministrationofjusticewhichisthefoundationofthecivilisedsociety.Bothasaleadingmemberofthe
intelligentsiaofthesocietyandasaresponsiblecitizen,thelawyerhastoconducthimselfasamodelforothersbothinhisprofessional
andinhisprivateandpubliclife.Thesocietyhasarighttoexpectofhimsuchidealbehavior.Itmustnotbeforgottenthatthelegal
professionhasalwaysbeenheldinhighesteemanditsmembershaveplayedanenviableroleinpubliclife.Theregardforthelegaland
judicialsystemsinthiscountryisinnosmallmeasureduetothetirelessroleplayedbythestalwartsintheprofessiontostrengthen
them.Theytooktheirprofessionseriouslyandpracticeitwithdignity,deferenceanddevotion.Iftheprofessionistosurvive,the
judicialsystemhastobevitalised.Noservicewillbetoosmallinmakingthesystemefficient,effectiveandcredible.InthecaseofSC
BarAssociationv.UnionofIndia,ithasbeenheldthatprofessionalmisconductmayalsoamounttoContemptofCourt.Ithasfurther
beenheldasfollows:AnAdvocatewhoisfoundguiltyofcontemptofcourtmayalso,asalreadynoticed,beguiltyofprofessional
misconductinagivencasebutitisfortheBarCounciloftheStateorBarCouncilofIndiatopunishthatadvocatebyeitherdebarring
himfrompracticeorsuspendinghislicence,asmaybewarranted,inthefactsandcircumstancesofeachcase.ThelearnedSolicitor
GeneralinformedusthattherehavebeencaseswheretheBarCouncilofIndiatakingnoteofthecontumaciousandobjectionable
conductofanadvocate,hadinitiateddisciplinaryproceedingsagainsthimandevenpunishedhimforprofessionalmisconduct,onthe
basisofhishavingbeenfoundguiltyofcommittingcontemptofcourt.

SolicitationofProfessionalWork

RajendraV.PaiV.AlexFernandesandOrs.Courtheldthatdebarringapersonfrompursuinghiscareerforhislifeisanextreme
punishmentandcallsforcautionandcircumspectionbeforebeingpassed.Nodoubtprobityandhighstandardsofethicsandmoralityin
professionalcareerparticularlyofanadvocatemustbemaintainedandcasesofprovedprofessionalmisconductseverelydealtwithyet,
westronglyfeelthatthepunishmentgiventotheappellantinthetotalityoffactsandcircumstancesofthecaseissodisproportionateas
topricktheconscienceoftheCourt.Undoubtedly,theappellantshouldnothaveindulgedintoprosecutingordefendingalitigationin
whichhehadapersonalinterestinviewofhisfamilypropertybeinginvolved.

BreachofTrustByMisappropriatingTheAssetOfClient

HarishChandraTiwariv.BaijuCourtheldonthesefact,AppellantHarishChandraTiwariwasenrolledasanadvocatewiththeBar
CounciloftheStateofUPinMay1982andhasbeenpractisingsincethen,mainlyinthecourtsatLakhimpurKheriDistrictinUP.
RespondentBaijuengagedthedelinquentadvocateinalandacquisitioncaseinwhichtherespondentwasaclaimantforcompensation.
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/print.php?art_id=1665

6/10

1/11/2017

PrintArticle:Professionalmisconductoflawyersinindia

TheDisciplinaryCommitteehasdescribedtherespondentasanold,helpless,poorilliterateperson.CompensationofRs.8118/for
theacquisitionofthelandofthesaidBaijuwasdepositedbytheStateinthecourt.Appellantappliedforreleasingtheamountandas
perordersofthecourthewithdrewthesaidamounton2.9.1987.Buthedidnotreturnittotheclienttowhomitwaspayablenordidhe
informtheclientaboutthereceiptoftheamount.Longthereafter,whentheclientcametoknowofitandafterfailingtogettheamount
returnedbytheadvocate,compliantwaslodgedbyhimwiththeBarCounciloftheStateforinitiatingsuitabledisciplinaryaction
againsttheappellant.Courtheldthatamongthedifferenttypesofmisconductenvisagedforalegalpractitionermisappropriationofthe
clientsmoneymustberegardedasoneofthegravest.Inthisprofessionalcapacitythelegalpractitionerhastocollectmoneyfromthe
clienttowardsexpensesofthelitigation,orwithdrawmoneyfromthecourtpayabletotheclientortakemoneyoftheclienttobe
depositedincourt.Inallsuchcases,whenthemoneyoftheclientreacheshishanditisatrust.Ifapublicservantmisappropriates
moneyheisliabletobepunishedunderthepresentPreventionofCorruptionAct,withimprisonmentwhichshallnotbelessthanone
year.Heiscertaintobedismissedfromservice.Butifanadvocatemisappropriatesmoneyoftheclientthereisnojustificationinde
escalatingthegravityofthemisdemeanor.Perhapsthedimensionofthegravityofsuchbreachoftrustwouldbemitigatedwhenthe
misappropriationremainedonlyforatemporaryperiod.Theremaybejustificationtoawardalesserpunishmentinacasewherethe
delinquentadvocatereturnedthemoneybeforecommencingthedisciplinaryproceedings.

InformingAboutBribe:ShambhuRamYadavv.HanumanDasKhatry,theCourtupheldtheorderofbarcouncilofIndiadated31st
July1999,whichheldthattheappellanthasservedasadvocatedfor50yearsanditwasnotexpectedofhimtoindulgeinsucha
practiceofcorruptingthejudiciaryorofferingbribetothejudgeandheadmittedlydemandedRs.10,000/fromhisclientandheorally
statedthatsubsequentlyorderwaspassedinhisclientsfavour.Thisisenoughtomakehimtotallyunfittobealawyerbywritingthe
letterinquestion.Wecannotimposeanylesserpunishmentthandebarringhimpermanentlyfromthepractice.Hisnameshouldbe
struckofffrom,therollofadvocatesmaintainedbytheBarCouncilofRajasthan.Hereaftertheappellantwillnothaveanyrightto
appearinanyCourtofLaw,Tribunaloranyauthority.CourtimposeacostofRs.5,000/totheappellantwhichshouldbepaidbythe
appellanttotheBarCouncilofIndiawhichhastobewithintwomonths.

Thelistofinstancesofprofessionalmisconductisnotexhaustive,theSupremecourthaswidenedthescopeandambitoftheterm
misconductinnumerousinstances,onlyfewcaseshasbeenelaboratedabove.
Slno Instanceofmisconduct
Retentionofmoneydepositedwithadvocateforthedecree
1
holderevenafterexecutionproceedings
2
MisguidingJuniorAdvocate

HeldinCase

Citation

PrahladSaranGuptaVBarcouncilofIndia

AIR1997.SC.1338

HarishChanderSinghVSNTripathi

AIR.1997SC879

AssaultingopponentwithKnifeinCourtroom

HikmatAliKhanvIshwarPrasadArya

AIR1997.SC864

ScandalisationagainstJudge

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

InreDCSaxena
AIR1996SC2481
UPSalestaxserviceassociationvtaxationBar
Attendingcourtwithfirearm
AIR1996.SC98
Association,Agra
Discussionoftheconductofjudgeandpassresolutionbybar CRavichandranIyervJusticeAM
1995.(2)KLT,SN
council,barassociationorgroupofpracticingadvocates
Bhattacharjee
56caseno77.
Failuretoreturnwillexecutedandkeptinsafecustody
JohnDSouzavedwardAni
1994.SC975
1993,(1)KLT650,
Constantabstentionfromconductingofcases
OnkarSinghVAngrezSingh
P&HHighCourt.
DSDalaiVStateBankofIndia
AIR1993SC1608
Misappropriationofamountpaid
/AIR1993.SC
JSJadhavvMustafaHajiMohamedYusuf
1535
Attestingforgedaffidavit
MVeerendraRaovTekChand
AIR1985SC28
Failuretoattendtrialafteracceptingthebrief
SJChoudharyvState
AIR1984SC618
Improperlegaladvice
PDKhandekarvBarCouncilofMaharastra AIR1984SC110
MisappropriationofDecretalamount
KVUmrevVenubai
AIR1983SC1154
ChandraSekharSonivBarCouncilof
Takingmoneyfromclientforthepurposeofgivingbribe
AIR1983SC1012
Rajastan
ThebarCouncilofMaharastravMV
Rushingtowardspotentialclientsandsnatchingbriefs
AIR1976SC242
Dabholkar
NAMirzanVthedisciplinarycommitteeof
Takingadvantageoftheignoranceandilliteracyoftheclients
AIR1972SC46
theBarcouncilofMaharastra
Appearingwithoutauthorityonaforgedvakalath
Inreadvocate
AIR1971Ker161
CDSekkizharvSecretary,BarCouncil,
Advertisingprofession
AIR1967Mad.35
Madras.
AIR1963.SC1313
InthematterofPanAdvocateand
Grossnegligenceinvolvingmoralturpitude
/AIR1997SC
VPKumaraveluvtheBarcouncilofIndia
1014
CoercingColleagues
InreBadriNarin
AIR1960Pt.307
Appearingforbothsides
RambharosaKalarvSurendranathThakur
AIR1960MP81
BrahmadinandothersvChandrasekhar

http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/print.php?art_id=1665

7/10

1/11/2017

PrintArticle:Professionalmisconductoflawyersinindia

22

FalseidentificationofDeponents

Shukla

AIR1958AP116

23

Indecentcrossexamination

ShriNarainJafaVTheHon.Judgesofthe
HighCourt,Allahabad

AIR1953SC368

24

Shoutingpoliticalslogansandholdingdemonstrationsin
court

Inthematterofapleader,Ottapalam

25

Attendingcourtindrunkenstate

26
27

Breachoftrust
bribe

28

Fraudandforgery

AIR1943,Mad.
130
AIR1934Rang.
Inthematterofalowergradepleader
423
BapuraoPakhiddeyvSumanDondey
1999(2)SCC442
PurushottamEknathNemadevDNMahajun 1999(20SCC215
LCGoyalvNawalKishore
and
1997(2)SCC258/
DevenderBhaiShankerMehtavRamesh
AIR1996SC2022
ChandraVithalDassSeth

ProcedureFollowedontheNoticeofProfessionalMisconduct
Thefollowingistheprocedurefollowed(1)InexerciseofpowersunderSection35containedinChapterVentitledconductof
advocates,onreceiptofacomplaintagainstanadvocate(orsuomotu)iftheStateBarCouncilhasreasontobelievethatany
advocateonitsrollhasbeenguiltyofprofessionalorothermisconduct,disciplinaryproceedingmaybeinitiatedagainsthim.
(2)NeitherSection35noranyotherprovisionoftheActdefinestheexpressionlegalmisconductortheexpressionmisconduct.
(3)TheDisciplinaryCommitteeoftheStateBarCouncilisauthorisedtoinflictpunishment,includingremovalofhisnamefromthe
rollsoftheBarCouncilandsuspendinghimfrompracticeforaperioddeemedfitbyit,aftergivingtheadvocateconcernedandthe
AdvocateGeneraloftheStateanopportunityofhearing.
(4)WhileunderSection42(1)oftheActtheDisciplinaryCommitteehasbeenconferredpowersvestedinacivilcourtinrespectof
certainmattersincludingsummoningandenforcingattendanceofanypersonandexamininghimonoath,theActwhichenjoinsthe
DisciplinaryCommitteetoaffordanopportunityofhearing(videSection35)totheadvocatedoesnotprescribetheproceduretobe
followedatthehearing.
(5)TheproceduretobefollowedinanenquiryunderSection35isoutlinedinPartVIIoftheBarCouncilofIndiaRulesmadeunder
theauthorityofSection60oftheAct.Rule8(1)ofthesaidRulesenjoinstheDisciplinaryCommitteetoheartheconcernedpartiesthat
istosaythecomplainantandtheconcernedadvocateasalsotheAttorneyGeneralortheSolicitorGeneralortheAdvocateGeneral.It
alsoenjoinsthatifitisconsideredappropriatetotakeoralevidencetheprocedureofthetrialofcivilsuitsshallasfaraspossiblebe
followed.
Critique
Theadvocatesact1961wasalongsoughtafterlegislationtoconsolidatethelawrelatingtothelegalpractioners,constitutionof
autonomousBarCouncils,prescriptionofuniformqualificationforadmissionandenrolmentofpersonsasadvocates,moreimportantly
itimposespunishmentforprofessionalmisconductbyadvocatesandinthatrespectitactsasaquasijudicialbody.Onlybodythatcan
beapproachedforprofessionalmisconductofadvocateisBarcouncilconstitutedundertheActexceptforcontemptofcourtwhichis
alsoamisconduct.HoweverthefollowingcriticismsarelevelledagainsttheActintermsofitspowertopunishforprofessionaland
othermisconduct
1)NoprovisionofappealisprovidedintheactinrespectiveHighcourts,hencepowerofbarCounciloftheStateisequatedwiththat
ofHighcourt.
2)InordinarycourseitisdifficultforanadvocatetoapproachtheSupremeCourtandgetthecaseadmittedfromanaggrievedorderof
theBarCouncilofIndia.
3)Theacthasnotdefinedthetermmisconduct,insteadithasincludedprofessionalandothermisconductanddefinitionislefttothe
BarcouncilsandSupremecourttodecideandtowidenthescope.
4)Denialoftheprincipleofnaturaljusticetoanordinarylitigantwhoisaggrievedwiththemisconductoftheadvocate,asthebodyof
theirassociationieBarcouncilisdecidingthecaseinwhichtheirownmemberistherespondent.Thisisagainsttherulethatnoman
canbeajudgeinhisowncase.ThelaypersonhastoapproachappropriateforaconstitutedunderConsumerProtectionact1986toget
anypecuniaryreliefduetothelosscausedbysuchmisconduct,ifitfitsunderdeficiencyofservice.
5)Attimes,basedonthecircumstancestheActisviolativeofArticle19(1)(g),righttopracticetradeorprofession,andalsofreedom
ofspeechandexpressionenshrinedinArticle19(1)(a).
Howevertheintentionofthelegislaturetoupholdthedignityoftheprofessionandtopreservethemoraletiquetteamonglegal
practionershavebeenlargelyachievedbytheAct.
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/print.php?art_id=1665

8/10

1/11/2017

PrintArticle:Professionalmisconductoflawyersinindia

Comparableprovisionsinothercountries
EnglandInEnglandTheLegalProfessionAct,1987isanActtoregulatetheadmissionandpracticeofbarristersandsolicitors(as
amendedin2007)andtheTheRevisedProfessionalConductandPracticeRulesmadebytheCounciloftheLawSocietyofNewSouth
Waleson24August1995pursuanttoitspowerunderSection57BoftheLegalProfessionAct,1987andtheStatementofEthics
proclaimedbytheLawSocietyofNewSouthWalesinNovember1994governstheconductinlegalprofession.From2010onwards
legalombudsmanisformedtodealwithcomplaintsagainstalllawyers,includingsolicitors,registeredinEnglandandWales.TheLegal
Ombudsmanreplacedthepreviouscomplainthandlingbodies(forexample,theLegalComplaintsServiceinthecaseofcomplaints
againstsolicitors),andhasbeendealingwithnewcomplaintssince6October2010.Anyonewhoisdissatisfiedwiththestandardof
servicereceivedfromtheirlawyershouldcomplain,inthefirstinstance,tothelawyerconcerned.Ifthemattercannotberesolvedin
thisway,thenacomplaintmaybemadetotheLegalOmbudsman.
USAinUSAeachstatehasaseparatesetofrulesofpracticesanddifferentcodeofconductfortheadvocates.Forexamplethe
newyorkstatehasaseparaterulesofProfessionalConductpromulgatedasJointRulesoftheAppellateDivisionsoftheSupremeCourt,
effectivefromApril1,2009.Theysupersedetheformerpart1200(DisciplinaryRulesoftheCodeofProfessionalResponsibility).
Indianastatehasseparaterulesforprofessionalconduct,whichelaboratesindetailaboutallaspectsofprofessionalconductandcodeof
ethicstobefollowedbyanadvocate.
Conclusion
Theroleofthelawyersinthesocietyisofgreatimportance.Theybeingpartofthesystemofdeliveringjusticeholdsgreatreverence
andrespectinthesociety.Eachindividualhasawelldefinedcodeofconductwhichneedstobefollowedbythepersonlivinginthe
society.Alawyerindischarginghisprofessionalassignmenthasadutytohisclient,adutytohisopponent,adutytothecourt,adutyto
thesocietyatlargeandadutytohimself.Itneedsahighdegreeofprobityandpoisetostrikeabalanceandarriveattheplaceof
righteousstand,moreso,whenthereareconflictingclaims.Whiledischargingdutytothecourt,alawyershouldneverknowinglybea
partytoanydeception,designorfraud.Whileplacingthelawbeforethecourtalawyerisatlibertytoputforthapropositionand
canvassthesametothebestofhiswitsandabilitysoastopersuadeanexpositionwhichwouldservetheinterestofhisclientandthe
society.
Theadvocate,asanofficeroftheCourt,alsohastheresponsibilitytorenderservicesofsoundquality.Lapsesinservicesinthenature
ofabsencewhenthemattersarecalledout,thefilingofincompleteandinaccuratepleadingsmanytimesevenillegibleandwithout
personalcheckandverification,thenonpaymentofcourtfeesandprocessfees,thefailuretoremoveofficeobjections,thefailureto
takestepstoservethepartiesarenotmerelyprofessionalomission.Theyamounttopositivedisservicetothelitigantsandcreate
embarrassingsituationinthecourtleadingtoavoidableunpleasantnessanddelayinthedisposalofmatters,anddetrimentallyaffects
theentirejudicialsystem.
Furthermore,astheofficersofthecourtthelawyersarerequiredtoupholdthedignityofthejudicialofficeandmaintainarespectful
attitudetowardstheCourt.ThisisbecausetheBarandtheBenchformanobleanddynamicpartnershipgearedtothegreatsocialgoal
ofadministrationofjustice,andthemutualrespectoftheBarandtheBenchisessentialformaintainingcordialrelationsbetweenthe
two.ItisthedutyofanadvocatetoupholdthedignityanddecorumoftheCourtandmustnotdoanythingtobringtheCourtitselfinto
disrepute,andensurethatatnopointoftime,heoverstepsthelimitsofpropriety.
*******************
Author:DrElbePeter,MDS,LL.B,DipClinRes./Theauthorcanbereachedat:
Tableofcases
1)StateofPunjabvRamSingh,AIR1992SC,2188
2)SambhuRamYadavv.HanumanDasKhatry20016SCC1.165
3)NoratanmalCourasiav.M.R.Murali2004AIR2440
4)N.G.Dastanev.ShrikantS.ShindeAIR2001SC2028
5)BarCouncilofMaharashtrav.M.V.Dahbolkar.AIR1976SC242
6)B.M.Vermav.UttrakhandRegulatoryCommission.AppealNo.156of2007
7)CourtofItsOwnMotionv.State.1512008DLT695(Del.,DB)
8)SCBarAssociationv.UnionofIndia.1998.4SCC409
9)AnilKumarSarkarv.HirakGhosh.2002.4SCC21
10)R.K.Ananadv.RegistrarofDelhiHC.2009.8SCC106
11)HikmatAlikhanv.Ishwarprasadaryaandors.1997RDSC87
12)Vinaychandramishra,inre,1995.2.SCC584
13)Excapt.HarishuppalV.UnionofIndia.2003(1)ALLMR(SC)1169
14)Lt.Col.S.J.Chaudharyv.State(DelhiAdministration.1984CriLJ340
15)K.JohnKoshyandOrs.v.Dr.TarakeshwarPrasadShaw:19988SCC624
16)IndianCouncilofLegalAidandAdvicev.BarCouncilofIndia.19951,SCR304
17)InRe:SanjeevDatta.1995CriLJ2910.
18)SCBarAssociationv.UnionofIndia,supra8
19)RajendraV.PaiV.AlexFernandesandOrs.AIR2002SC1808.
20)HarishChandraTiwariv.BaijuAIR2002SC548.
21)SambhuRamYadavv.HanumanDasKhatrysupra2
elbepeter@legalserviceindia.com

http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/print.php?art_id=1665

9/10

1/11/2017

PrintArticle:Professionalmisconductoflawyersinindia

#AIR1992S2188
#(2001)6SCC165
#2004AIR2440
#2001AIRSC2028
#AIR1976SC242
#AppealNo.156of2007
#151(2008)DLT695(Del.,DB)
#(1998)4SCC409
#(2002)4SCC21
#(2009)8SCC106
#[1997]RDSC87
#19952SCC584
#2003(1)ALLMR(SC)1169
#1984CriLJ340
#19988SCC624
#19951SCR304
#1995CriLJ2910
#Supra8
#AIR2002SC1808
#AIR2002SC548
#Supra2
ThisarticlehasbeenAwarded
CertificateofExcellenceforOriginal
LegalResearchworkbyourPenalof
Judges

http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/print.php?art_id=1665

10/10