JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA

Clinical Course Project

DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS
AGAINST LAWYERS

Submitted to: Submitted by:

ADV. RASHMI BANSAL VIJAY SHANKAR V.L.

Sem- X, B.A.LL.B (H)

Section- A

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1
1. Acknowledgment

2. Research Methodology

3. Introduction

4. Meaning and Definition of Professional Misconduct

5. What amounts to Professional Misconduct of Lawyers?

6. Provisions for Disciplinary Action against Lawyers

A. Provisions in Advocates Act, 1961

B. The Code of Conduct prescribed for Lawyers

7. Procedure followed on the notice of Professional Misconduct

8. Cases on Specific Grounds

A. Contempt of Court

B. Attempt of Murder

C. Strike

D. Solicitation of Professional Work

E. Breach of Trust by Misappropriating the Assets of Client

F. Bribery

9. Rules of Bar Council of India

A. Rules on an Advocate’s Duty towards the Court

B. Rules on an Advocate’s Duty towards the Client

C. Rules on Advocate’s Duty to Opponents

D. Rules on an Advocate’s Duty towards Fellow Advocates

E. Chapter VII of BCI Rules

2
 10. State Bar Council and its Disciplinary Committee

A. Section 36

B. Section 36-B

C. Section 44

11. Role of Disciplinary Committee

A. Organisation of Disciplinary Committee

B. Enquiry Procedure of Disciplinary Committee

C. Powers of Disciplinary Committee of Bar Council of India

D. Powers of Disciplinary Committee of State Bar Councils

12. Appeals

A. Appeal to Bar Council of India

B. Appeal to Supreme Court

13. Cases on Professional Misconduct

14. Cases on Contempt of Court

15.Conclusion

16.Bibliography

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

3
 Through this project, I express deep sense of gratitude to ADVOCATE
RASHMI BANSAL, for her valuable guidance, and supervision which
provided me with the strength and passion to complete the project work.
This project was not a mere assignment for me but was a great learning
opportunity in the subject of Professional Misconduct of Lawyers and the
Disciplinary proceedings against them. I am also obliged and thankful to my
classmates for their valuable information provided by them in completion of
this project.

Thank You,

VIJAY SHANKAR V. L.

18-04-2017

4
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

The Methodology used in the assignment is Doctrinal Method of Research,

and the material is collected from statutes, textbook, published articles, internet
information and other sources which are specified in the Bibliography page.

5
Introduction
Advocacy is a noble profession and an advocate is the most accountable,
privileged and erudite person of the society and his act are role model for
society, which are necessary to be regulated. Professional misconduct is the
behaviour outside the bounds of what is considered acceptable or worthy of its
membership by the governing body of a profession. Professional misconduct
refers to disgraceful or dishonourable conduct not befitting an advocate.
Chapter V of the Advocates Act, 1961, deals with the conduct of Advocates. It
describes provisions relating to punishment for professional and other
misconducts. Section 35(1) of the Advocate Act, 1961, says, where on receipt
of a complaint or otherwise a State Bar Council has reason to believe that any
advocate on its roll has been guilty of professional or other misconduct, it shall
refer the case for disposal to it disciplinary committee. Generally legal
profession is not a trade or business, it’s a gracious, noble, and decontaminated
profession of the society. Members belonging to this profession should not
encourage deceitfulness and corruption, but they have to strive to secure justice
to their clients. The credibility and reputation of the profession depends upon
the manner in which the members of the profession conduct themselves. It’s a
symbol of healthy relationship between Bar and Bench.

The Advocates Act, 1961 as well as the Bar Council of India are silent in
providing exact definition for professional misconduct because of its wide
scope, though under Advocates Act, 1961 to take disciplinary action
punishments are prescribed when the credibility and reputation on the
profession comes under a clout on account of acts of omission and commission
by any member of the profession.1

1
Peter, Dr. Elbe, Professional Misconduct of Lawyers in India, Published on June 06, 2014, available at
http://www.legalservicesindia.com, last referred on April 12, 2017.

6
Meaning and Definition of Professional
Misconduct
According to Hodge and Johnson, Profession is a vocation requiring some
significant body of knowledge that is applied with high degree of consistency in
the service of some relevant segment of society.

According to A. S. Hornby, Occupation is especially one requiring

advanced education and special training. It is different from other types of jobs,
in the sense that it requires skills and these skills will be improved with
experience.

The attributes of a profession as laid down by Dalton E. McFarland are:

1) The existence of a body of specialized knowledge or techniques

2) Formalized method of acquiring training and experience
3) The establishment of representative organization with
professionalism as its goal.
4) The formation of ethical codes for the guidance of conduct.
5) The charging of fees based on services but with due regards for the
priority of service over the desire for monetary rewards.

A person who carries or undertakes the profession is called a professional.

Depending on the profession a person undertakes, the person is identified with a
special name relevant to the profession.

According to Oxford Dictionary, Misconduct means a wrongful, improper,

or unlawful conduct motivated by premeditated act. It is a behaviour not
conforming to prevailing standards or laws, or dishonest or bad management,
especially by persons entrusted or engaged to act on another's behalf. The
expression professional misconduct in the simple sense means improper

7
conduct. In law profession misconduct means an act done wilfully with a wrong
intention by the people engaged in the profession. It means any activity or
behaviour of an advocate in violation of professional ethics for his selfish ends.
If an act creates disrespect to his profession and makes him unworthy of being
in the profession, it amounts to professional misconduct. In other word an act
which disqualifies an advocate to continue in legal profession.

‘Misconduct’ per se has been defined in the Black’s Law Dictionary to be

“any transgression of some established and definite rule of action, a forbidden
act, unlawful or improper behaviour, wilful in character, a dereliction of duty.”

8
What amounts to Professional
Misconduct of Lawyers?
To understand the scope and implication of the term ‘misconduct’, the
context of the role and responsibility of an advocate should be kept in mind.
Misconduct is a sufficiently wide expression, and need not necessarily imply the
involvement of moral turpitude. The Supreme Court has opined that the word
“misconduct” has no precise meaning, and its scope and ambit has to be
construed with reference to the subject matter and context wherein the term
occurs. In the context of misconduct of an advocate, any conduct that in any
way renders an advocate unfit for the exercise of his profession, or is likely to
hamper or embarrass the administration of justice may be considered to amount
to misconduct, for which disciplinary action may be initiated.

Legal Practioners Act, 1879 has not defined the word Misconduct. The
word “Unprofessional Conduct” is used in the act. Even the Advocates Act
1961 has not defined the term misconduct because of the wide scope and
application of the term. Hence to understand the instances of misconduct we
have to rely on decided cases. Some of the instances of Professional misconduct
are as follows:

1) Dereliction of duty
2) Professional negligence
3) Misappropriation
4) Changing sides
5) Contempt of court and improper behaviour before a magistrate
6) Furnishing false information
7) Giving improper advice
8) Misleading the clients in court
9) Non speaking the truth
9
 10) Disowning allegiance to court
11) Moving application without informing that a similar application
has been rejected by another authority
12) Suggesting to bribe the court officials
13) Forcing the prosecution witness not to tell the truth.

Darling J., defined the expression professional misconduct in, In Re A

Solicitor ex parte the law society as, it is shown that the advocate in the pursuit
of his profession has done something with regard to it which would be
reasonably regarded as disgraceful or dishonourable by his professional
brethren of good repute and competent, then it is open to say that he is guilty of
professional misconduct.

Misconduct is sufficiently comprehensive to include misfeasance as well

as malfeasance and is applied to the professional people, it include
unprofessional acts even though they are not inherently wrongful. The
professional misconduct may consist the fact in any conduct, which tends to
bring reproach on the legal profession or to alienate the favourable opinion
which the public should entertain concerning it.

In State of Punjab v Ram Singh,2 the Supreme Court held that the term
‘misconduct’ may involve moral turpitude, it must be improper or wrong
behaviour, unlawful behaviour, wilful in character, a forbidden act, a
transgression of established and definite rule of action or code of conduct, but
not mere error of judgement, carelessness or negligence in performance of duty.

The Supreme Court has, in some of its decisions, elucidated on the concept
of ‘misconduct’, and its application. In Sambhu Ram Yadav v. Hanuman Das
Khatry,3 a complaint was filed by the appellant against an advocate to the Bar
Council of Rajasthan, that while appearing in a suit as a counsel, he wrote a
2
AIR 1992 SC 2188
3
(2001) 6 SCC 165

10
letter stating that the concerned judge, before whom the suit is pending accepts
bribes, and asked for Rs. 10,000 to bribe and influence the judge to obtain a
favourable order. The Disciplinary Committee, holding that the advocate was
guilty if “misconduct”, stated that such an act made the advocate “totally unfit
to be a lawyer.” The Supreme Court, upholding the finding of the Rajasthan Bar
Council held that the legal profession is not a trade or business. Members
belonging to the profession have a particular duty to uphold the integrity of the
profession and to discourage corruption in order to ensure that justice is secured
in a legal manner. The act of the advocate was misconduct of the highest degree
as it not only obstructed the administration of justice, but eroded the reputation
of the profession in the opinion of the public.

In another case, Noratanman Courasia v. M. R. Murali,4 the Supreme

Court explored the amplitude and extent of the words “professional
misconduct” in Section 35 of the Advocates Act. The facts of the case involved
an advocate (appearing as a litigant in the capacity of the respondent, and not an
advocate in a rent control proceeding) assaulted and kicked the complainant and
asked him to refrain from proceeding with the case. The main issue in this case
was whether the act of the advocate amounted to misconduct, the action against
which could be initiated in the Bar Council, even though he was not acting in
the capacity of an advocate. It was upheld by the Supreme Court that a lawyer is
obliged to observe the norms of behaviour expected of him, which make him
worthy of the confidence of the community in him as an officer of the Court.
Therefore, in spite of the fact that he was not acting in his capacity as an
advocate, his behaviour was unfit for an advocate, and the Bar Council was
justified in proceeding with the disciplinary proceedings against him.

It may be noted that in arriving at the decision in the case, the Supreme
Court carried out an over-view of the jurisprudence of the courts in the area of

4
AIR 2004 SC 2440

11
misconduct of advocates. It reiterated that the term “misconduct” is incapable of
a precise definition. Broadly speaking, it envisages any instance of breach of
discipline. It means improper behaviour, intentional wrongdoing or deliberate
violation of a rule of standard of behaviour. The term may also include
wrongful intention, which is not a mere error of judgment. Therefore,
“misconduct”, though incapable of a precise definition, acquires its connotation
from the context, the delinquency in its performance and its effect on the
discipline and the nature of duty.

In N.G. Dastane v. Shrikant S. Shind,5 where the advocate of one of the

parties was asking for continuous adjournments to the immense inconvenience
of the opposite party, it was held by the Supreme Court that seeking
adjournments for postponing the examination of witnesses who were present
without making other arrangements for examining such witnesses is a
dereliction of the duty that an advocate owed to the Court, amounting to
misconduct.

Ultimately, as it has been upheld and reiterated that “misconduct” would

cover any activity or conduct which his professional brethren of good repute
and competency would reasonably regard as disgraceful or dishonourable. It
may be noted that the scope of “misconduct” is not restricted by technical
interpretations of rules of conduct. This was proven conclusively in the case
of Bar Council of Maharashtra v. M.V. Dahbolkar,6 the facts under
consideration involved advocates positioning themselves at the entrance to the
Magistrate’s courts and rushing towards potential litigants, often leading to an
ugly scrimmage to snatch briefs and undercutting of fees. The Disciplinary
Committee of the state Bar Council found such behaviour to amount to
professional misconduct, but on appeal to the Bar Council of India, it was the
Bar Council of India absolved them of all charges of professional misconduct
5
AIR 2001 SC 2028
6
AIR 1976 SC 242

12
on the ground that the conduct did not contravene Rule 36 of the Standards of
Professional Conduct and Etiquette as the rule required solicitation of work
from a particular person with respect to a particular case, and this case did not
meet all the necessary criteria and such method of solicitation could not amount
to misconduct. This approach of the Bar council of India was heavily
reprimanded by the Supreme Court. It was held that restrictive interpretation of
the relevant rule by splitting up the text does not imply that the conduct of the
advocates was warranted or justified. The standard of conduct of advocates
flows from the broad cannons of ethics and high tome of behaviour. It was held
that “professional ethics cannot be contained in a Bar Council rule nor in
traditional cant in the books but in new canons of conscience which will
command the member of the calling of justice to obey rules or morality and
utility.” Misconduct of advocates should thus be understood in a context-
specific, dynamic sense, which captures the role of the advocate in the society at
large.

13
Provisions for Disciplinary Action
against Lawyers
PROVISIONS IN ADVOCATES ACT 1961

The Advocates Act 1961 is a comprehensive legislation that regulates the

legal practice and legal education in India. It envisages for the establishment of
Bar Council of India and State Bar Councils with various disciplinary
committees to deal with misconduct of the advocates. It also provides for the
provisions relating to the admission and enrolment of advocates and advocates
right to practice. Chapter V containing Sections 35 to 44 deals with the
conduct of the advocates. It provides for punishment for advocates for
professional and other misconduct and disciplinary powers of the Bar council of
India. In order to attract the application of Section 35 of the Advocates Act the
misconduct need not be professional misconduct alone. The expression used in
the section is Professional or other misconduct. So even if conduct is
unconnected with the profession may account to a misconduct as for example,
conviction for a crime, though the crime was not committed in the professional
capacity. At the same time it is to be noted that a mere conviction is not
sufficient to find an advocate guilty of misconduct, the court must look in to the
nature of the act on which the conviction is based to decide whether the
advocate is or is not an unfit person to be removed from or to be allowed to
remain in the profession.

Misconduct is of infinite variety, the expression professional or other

misconduct must be understood in their plain and natural meaning and there is
no justification in restricting their natural meaning. The term misconduct
usually implies an act done wilfully with a wrong intention and as applied to

14
professional people it includes unprofessional acts even though such acts are not
inherently wrongful.

Section 35: Punishment of advocates for misconduct.

(1) Where on receipt of a complaint or otherwise a State Bar Council has reason
to believe that any advocate on its roll has been guilty of professional or other
misconduct, it shall refer the case for disposal to its disciplinary committee.
(1A) The State Bar Council may, either of its own motion or on application
made to it by any person interested, withdraw a proceeding pending before its
disciplinary committee or direct the inquiry to be made by any other
disciplinary committee of that State Bar Council.
(2) The disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council shall fix a date for the
hearing of the case and shall cause a notice thereof to be given to the advocate
concerned and to the Advocate-General of the State.
(3) The disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council after giving the advocate
concerned and the Advocate-General an opportunity of being heard, may make
any of the following orders, namely:—
(a) dismiss the complaint or, where the proceedings were initiated at the
instance of the State Bar Council, direct that the proceedings be filed;
(b) reprimand the advocate;
(c) suspend the advocate from practice for such period as it may deem fit;
(d) remove the name of the advocate from the State roll of advocates.
(4) Where an advocate is suspended from practice under clause (c) of sub-
section (3), he shall, during the period of suspension, be debarred from
practising in any court or before any authority or person in India.
(5) Where any notice is issued to the Advocate-General under sub-section (2),
the Advocate-General may appear before the disciplinary committee of the State
Bar Council either in person or through any advocate appearing on his behalf.

15
 Section 36: Disciplinary powers of Bar Council of India.
(1) Where on receipt of a complaint or otherwise the Bar Council of India has
reason to believe that any advocate whose name is not entered on any State roll
has been guilty of professional or other misconduct, it shall refer the case for
disposal to its disciplinary committee.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Chapter, the disciplinary
committee of the Bar Council of India may, either of its own motion or on a
report by a State Bar Council or on an application made to it by any person
interested, withdraw for inquiry before itself any proceedings for disciplinary
action against any advocate pending before the disciplinary committee of any
State Bar Council and dispose of the same.
(3) The disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India, in disposing of any
case under this section, shall observe, so far as may be, the procedure laid down
in section 35, the references to the Advocate-General in that section being
construed as references to the Attorney-General of India.
(4) In disposing of any proceedings under this section the disciplinary
committee of the Bar Council of India may make any order which the
disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council can make under sub-section (3) of
section 35, and where any proceedings have been withdrawn for inquiry before
the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India the State Bar Council
concerned shall give effect to any such order.

Section 36A: Changes in constitution of disciplinary committees.

Whenever in respect of any proceedings under section 35 or section 36, a
disciplinary committee of the State Bar Council or a disciplinary committee of
the Bar Council of India ceases to exercise jurisdiction and is succeeded by
another committee which has and exercises jurisdiction, the disciplinary
committee of the State Bar Council or the disciplinary committee of the Bar
Council of India, as the case may be, so succeeding may continue the

16
proceeding from the stage at which the proceedings were so left by its
predecessor committee.

Section 36B: Disposal of disciplinary proceedings.

(1) The disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council shall dispose of the
complaint received by it under section 35 expeditiously and in each case the
proceedings shall be concluded within a period of one year from the date of the
receipt of the complaint or the date of initiation of the proceedings at the
instance of the State Bar Council, as the case may be, failing which such
proceedings shall stand transferred to the Bar Council of India which may
dispose of the same as if it were a proceeding withdrawn for inquiry under sub-
section (2) of section 36.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where on the
commencement of the Advocates (Amendment) Act, 1973 (60 of 1973), any
proceedings in the respect of any disciplinary matter against an advocate is
pending before the disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council, that
disciplinary committee of the State Bar Council shall dispose of the same within
a period of six months from the date of such commencement or within a period
of one year from the date of the receipt of the complaint or, as the case may be
the date of initiation of the proceedings at the instance of the State Bar Council,
whichever is later, failing which such other proceedings shall stand transferred
to the Bar Council of India for disposal under sub-section (1).

Section 37: Appeal to the Bar Council of India.

(1) Any person aggrieved by an order of the disciplinary committee of a State
Bar Council made under section 35 or the Advocate General of the State may,
within sixty days of the date of the communication of the order to him, prefer an
appeal to the Bar Council of India.

17
(2) Every such appeal shall be heard by the disciplinary committee of the Bar
Council of India which may pass such order (including an order varying the
punishment awarded by the disciplinary committee of the State Bar Council)
thereon as it deems fit: Provided that no order of the disciplinary committee of
the State Bar Council shall be varied by the disciplinary committee of the Bar
Council of India so as to prejudicially affect the person aggrieved without
giving him reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Section 38: Appeal to the Supreme Court.

Any person aggrieved by an order made by the disciplinary committee of the
Bar Council of India under section 36 or section 37 or the Attorney-General of
India or the Advocate-General of the State concerned, as the case may be, may
within sixty days of the date on which the order is communicated to him, prefer
an appeal to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court may pass such order
(including an order varying the punishment awarded by the disciplinary
committee of the Bar Council of India) thereon as it deems fit:
Provided that no order of the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India
shall be varied by the Supreme Court so as to prejudicially affect the person
aggrieved without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

Section 39: Application of sections 5 and 12 of Limitation Act, 1963.

The provisions of sections 5 and 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 (36 of 1963),
shall, so far as may be, apply to appeals under section 37 and section 38.

Section 40: Stay of order.

(1) An appeal, made under section 37 or section 38, shall not operate as a stay
of the order appealed against, but the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council
of India, or the Supreme Court, as the case may be, may, from sufficient cause,
direct the stay of such order on such terms and conditions as it may deem fit.

18
(2) Where an application is made for the stay of the order before the expiration
of the times allowed for appealing there from under section 37 or section 38, the
disciplinary committee of the State Bar Council, or the disciplinary committee
of the Bar Council of India, as the case may be, may, for sufficient cause, direct
the stay of such order on such terms and conditions as it may deem fit.

Section 41: Alteration in roll of Advocates.

(1) Where an order is made under this Chapter reprimanding or suspending an
advocate, a record of the punishment shall be entered against his name—
(a) in the case of an advocate whose name is entered in a State roll, in that roll;
2[***] any where any order is made removing an advocate from practice,
his name shall be struck of the State roll 3[***].
4[***]
(3) Where any advocate is suspended or removed from practice, the certificate
granted to him under section 22, in respect of his enrolment shall be recalled.

Section 42: Powers of disciplinary committee.

(1) The disciplinary committee of a Bar Council shall have the same powers as
are vested in a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908),
in respect of the following matters, namely:—
(a) summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and
examining him on oath;
(b) requiring discovery and production of any documents;
(c) receiving evidence on affidavits;
(d) requisitioning any public record or copies thereof from any court or
office;
(e) issuing commissions for the examination of witness or documents;
(f) any other matter which may be prescribed:

19
Provided that no such disciplinary committee shall have the right to require the
attendance of—
(a) any presiding officer of a Court except with the previous sanction of
the High Court to which such court is subordinate;
(b) any officer of a revenue court except with the previous sanction of the
State Government.
(2) All proceedings before a disciplinary committee of a Bar Council shall be
deemed to be judicial proceedings within the meaning of sections 193 and 228
of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), and every such disciplinary
committee shall be deemed to be a civil court for the purposes of sections 480,
482 and 485 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (5 of 1898).
(3) For the purposes of exercising any of the powers conferred by sub-section
(1), a disciplinary committee may send to any civil court in the territories to
which this Act extends, any summons or other process, for the attendance of a
witness or the production of a document required by the committee or any
commission which it desires to issue, and the civil court shall cause such
process to be served or such commission to be issued, as the case may be, and
may enforce any such process as if it were a process for attendance or
production before itself.
(4) Notwithstanding the absence of the Chairman or any member of a
disciplinary committee on date fixed for the hearing of a case before it, the
disciplinary committee may, if it so thinks fit, hold or continue the proceedings
on the date so fixed and no such proceedings and no order made by the
disciplinary committee in any such proceedings shall be invalid merely by
reason of the absence of the Chairman or member thereof on any such date:
Provided that no final orders of the nature referred to in subsection (3) of
section 35 shall be made in any proceeding unless the Chairman and other
members of the disciplinary committee are present.

20
(5) Where no final order of the nature referred to in sub-section (3) of section 35
can be made in any proceedings in accordance with the opinion of the Chairman
and the members of a disciplinary committee either for want of majority opinion
amongst themselves or otherwise, the case, with their opinion thereon, shall be
laid before the Chairman of the Bar Council concerned or if the Chairman of the
Bar Council is acting as the Chairman or a member of the disciplinary
committee, before the Vice-Chairman of the Bar Council, and the said
Chairman or the Vice Chairman of the Bar Council, as the case may be, after
such hearing as he thinks fit, shall deliver his opinion and the final order of the
disciplinary committee shall follow such opinion.
Section 42A: Powers of Bar Council of India and other committees.
The provisions of section 42 shall, so far as may be, apply in relation to the Bar
Council of India, the enrolment committee, the election committee, the legal aid
committee, or any other committee of a Bar Council as they, apply in relation to
the disciplinary committee of a Bar Council.
Section 43: Cost of proceedings before a disciplinary committee.
The disciplinary committee of a Bar Council may make such order as to the cost
of any proceedings before it as it may deem fit and any such order shall be
executable as it were an order—
(a) in the case of an order of the disciplinary committee of the Bar
Council of India, of the Supreme Court;
(b) in the case of an order of the disciplinary committee of a State Bar
Council, of the High Court.
Section 44: Review of orders by disciplinary committee.
The disciplinary committee of a Bar Council may of its own motion or
otherwise review any order within sixty days of the date of that order passed by
it under this Chapter: Provided that no such order of review of the disciplinary
committee of a State Bar Council shall have effect unless it has been approved
by the Bar Council of India.

21
THE CODE OF CONDUCT PRESCRIBED FOR LAWYERS

Section 49 of the Advocates Act 1961 empowers the Bar Council of India
to frame rules regulating standards of professional conduct. Accordingly various
duties are prescribed for the advocates some of them are highlighted below.

1. No advertising or soliciting work, it is against an advocate’s code of ethics

to solicit or advertise work and amounts to a misconduct on the part of the
advocate. Both direct and indirect advertising is prohibited. An advocate
may not advertise his services through circulars, advertisements, touts,
personal communication or interviews not warranted by personal relations.
Similarly, the following forms of indirect advertising are prohibited:
(i) by issuing circulars or election manifestos by a lawyer with his
name, profession and address printed on the manifestos, thereby
appealing to the members of the profession practising in the lower
courts who are in a position to recommend clients to counsel
practising in the HC.
(ii) canvassing for votes by touring in the province or sending out his
clerk or agents to the various districts, which must necessarily
mean directly approaching advocates practicing in subordinate
courts. Further, the signboard or nameplate displayed by an
advocate should be of reasonable size. It should not refer to
details of an affiliated by the advocate i.e. that he is or has been
president or member of a bar council or of any association, or he
has been a Judge or an Advocate-General, or that he specializes in
a particular kind of work, or that he is or was associated with any
person or organization or with any particular cause or matter.
2. Not to demand fees for training: An advocate is restrained from demanding
any fees for imparting training to enable any person to qualify for
enrolment.

22
 3. Not use name/services for unauthorized practice: An advocate may not
allow his professional services or his name to be associated with, or be
used for any unauthorized practice of law by any lay agency.
4. Not to enter appearance without consent of the advocate already engaged:
An advocate is prohibited from entering appearance in a case where there
is already another advocate engaged for a party except with the consent of
such advocate. However if such consent is not produced, the advocate must
state the reasons for not producing it, and may appear subsequently, only
with the permission of the court.
5. Duty to opposite party: While conducting a case, a lawyer has a duty to be
fair not only to his client but also to the court, and to the opposite party. An
advocate for a party must communicate or negotiate with the other parties
regarding the subject matter of controversy, only through the opposite
party’s advocate. If an advocate has made any legitimate promises to the
opposite party, he should fulfil the same, even if the promise was not
reduced to writing or enforceable under the rules of the court.
6. Duties of an advocate towards his client: The relationship between a
lawyer and a client is highly fiduciary and it is the duty of an advocate
fearlessly to uphold the interests of the client by fair and honourable means
without regard to any unpleasant consequences to himself or any other
person.

The above are only few important code of conduct to be observed by an

advocate practicing in India. According to Justice Abbot Parry, there are seven
important qualities that a lawyer should possess, he calls these qualities as seven
lamps of advocacy, and they are: Honesty, Courage, Industry, Wit, eloquence,
Judgement, and Fellowship.
Apart from that the Panchsheel of the bar are Honesty, Industry, Justice,
Service and Philosophy and Panchsheel of the bench according to Sri Ram

23
Kishore Rande are: Impartiality, Independence, Integrity and Industry, Judicial
activism and Prayer.
Among the various duties of the advocates like, duties to client, court,
public, colleagues and self, selected points can be picked up and arranged
according to the due and relative importance and are called as ten
commandments of advocates they are:
a) Duties to client
1) Protection of the interest of the client
2) Proper estimation of the value of legal advices and services
b) Duties to court
3) Honesty and respect
4) Preparation of the case
c) Duties to Public
5) Service
6) Loyalty to law and justice
d) Duties to colleagues
7) Fellowship
8) Fairness
e) Duties to self
9) Systematic study
10) Prudence and diligence

The rules laid down by the Bar Council of India forms the code of conduct
for advocates and in broad sense any violation of such rules or code of conduct
can be termed as professional misconduct. The scope of the term has been still
widened by the Supreme Court in various decisions.

24
Procedure Followed on the Notice of
Professional Misconduct
The following is the procedure followed:

(1) In exercise of powers under Section 35 contained in Chapter V

entitled “conduct of advocates”, on receipt of a complaint against
an advocate (or suo motu) if the State Bar Council has ‘reason to
believe’ that any advocate on its roll has been guilty of
“professional or other misconduct”, disciplinary proceeding may
be initiated against him.
(2) The Disciplinary Committee of the State Bar Council is
authorised to inflict punishment, including removal of his name
from the rolls of the Bar Council and suspending him from
practice for a period deemed fit by it, after giving the advocate
concerned and the ‘Advocate General’ of the State an opportunity
of hearing.
(3) While under Section 42(1) of the Act the Disciplinary Committee
has been conferred powers vested in a civil court in respect of
certain matters including summoning and enforcing attendance of
any person and examining him on oath, the Act which enjoins the
Disciplinary Committee to ‘afford an opportunity of hearing’
(vide Section 35) to the advocate does not prescribe the procedure
to be followed at the hearing.
(4) The procedure to be followed in an enquiry under Section 35 is
outlined in Part VII of the Bar Council of India Rules made under
the authority of Section 60 of the Act. Rule 8(1) of the said Rules
enjoins the Disciplinary Committee to hear the concerned parties
that is to say the complainant and the concerned advocate as also

25
the Attorney General or the Solicitor General or the Advocate
General. It also enjoins that if it is considered appropriate to take
oral evidence the procedure of the trial of civil suits shall as far as
possible be followed.

26
Contempt of Court as Misconduct
Contempt of court may be defined as an offense of being disobedient or
disrespectful towards the court or its officers in the form of certain behaviour
that defies authority, justice, and dignity of the court. 7 In various cases
involving contempt of court, the court held that if any advocate or legal
practitioner is found guilty of the act of contempt of court, he or she may be
imprisoned for six years and may be suspended from practicing as an advocate. 
In Re Vinay Chandra Mishra,8 the court also held that license of the advocate
to practice a legal profession might be cancelled by the Supreme Court or High
Court in the exercise of the contempt jurisdiction. In this case an advocate was
found guilty of criminal contempt of Court and he was sentenced to undergo
simple imprisonment for a period of six years and suspended from practising as
an advocate for a period of three years. The punishment of imprisonment was
suspended for a period of four years and was to be activated in case of his
conviction for any other offence of contempt of court within the said period.
The Court held that the license of an advocate to practice legal profession may
be suspended or cancelled by the Supreme Court or High Court in the exercise
of the contempt jurisdiction.

It was laid down that Supreme Court can take cognizance of the contempt
of High Court. Being the Court of record, the Supreme Court has the power to
punish for the Contempt of courts subordinate to it. Thus, the Supreme Court is
fully competent to take cognizance of the contempt of the High Courts or courts
subordinate to it. It was also claimed that the Judge before whom the contempt
has been committed should be excluded. This claim was not sustainable in the
view of the Court. It observed further that its contempt jurisdiction under
Article 129 of the Constitution cannot be restricted or taken away by a statute,
7
Retrieved on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_court
8
In Re: Vinay Chandra Mishra AIR 1995 SC 2348

27
be it the Advocates Act, 1961 or the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The Court
has also observed that the contempt jurisdiction of the superior courts is not
based on the statutory provisions but it is inherent jurisdiction available to them
on account of being a court of record. As regards the procedure to be followed
the court has observed that the Courts of record can deal with summarily with
all types of contempt. With regards to Article 142 of the Constitution the Court
observed that the jurisdiction and powers of the Supreme Court which are
supplementary in nature and are provided to do complete justice in any manner,
are independent of the jurisdiction and powers of Supreme Court which are
supplementary in nature and are provided to do complete justice in any manner,
are independent of the jurisdiction and powers of Supreme Court under Article
129 which cannot be trammelled in any manner by any statutory provision
including any provision including any provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961 or
the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

The Advocates Act, 1961 has nothing to do with the contempt jurisdiction
of the Court, and the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 being a statute cannot
denude, restrict or limit the powers of this Court to take action for contempt
under Article 129. The Supreme Court also held that it being appellate authority
under Section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961 can impose punishment
mentioned in Section 35 of the said Act. Thus, the Supreme Court may suspend
or cancel the licence of an advocate to practice his profession for contempt of
court. It finally said that the threat of immediate punishment is the most
effective deterrent against the misconduct. They emphasized that the time factor
was crucial and dragging the contempt proceedings means a lengthy
interruption to the main proceedings which paralysed the Court for a long time.

This case9 was overruled in the case of Supreme Court Bar Association v.
Union of India10. Aggrieved by the direction that the contemnor shall stand
9
Ibid
10
(1998) 4 SCC 409

28
suspended from practising as an advocate for a period of three years issued by
the Supreme Court by invoking powers under Article 129 and 142 of the
Constitution, the Supreme Court Bar Association, through its Honorary
Secretary, filed a petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking
relief by way of issuing an appropriate writ, direction or declaration, declaring
that the disciplinary committees of the Bar Councils set up under the Advocates
Act, 1961, alone have exclusive jurisdiction to inquire into and suspend or debar
an advocate from practising law for professional or other misconduct, arising
out of punishment imposed for contempt of court or otherwise and further
declare that the Supreme Court of India or any High Court in exercise of its
inherent jurisdiction has no such original jurisdiction, power or authority in that
regard notwithstanding the contrary view held by this Hon’ble Court in Re
Vinay Chandra Mishra.

The Petition was placed before a Constitutional bench for passing the
appropriate direction, order or declaration. The bench identified a single
question and had to decide upon was whether the Supreme Court of India can
while dealing with Contempt proceedings exercise power under Article 129 of
the Constitution or under Article 129 read with Article 142 of the Constitution,
debar a practicing lawyer from carrying on his profession as a lawyer for any
period whatsoever.

With reference to Article 142 of the Constitution of India the Court

observed that when this court takes cognizance of a matter of contempt of court
by an advocate, there is no case because matter before it regarding his
professional misconduct even though in a given case, the contempt committed
by an advocate may also amount to an abuse of the privilege granted to an
advocate by virtue of the license to practice law. No issue relating to his
suspension from practice is the subject matter of the case.

29
 In the case of B. M. Verma v. Uttarakhand Regulatory Commission,11
court noted that, it was given the wide powers available with a Court exercising
contempt jurisdiction. In the case of Court of Its Own Motion v. State 12 dealing
with the contempt proceedings involving two senior advocates, observed that
‘given the wide powers available with a Court exercising contempt jurisdiction,
it cannot afford to be hypersensitive and therefore, a trivial misdemeanour
would not warrant contempt action.

In the most controversial and leading case of R.K. Ananad v. Registrar of

Delhi,13 High Court, on 30th May, 2007 a TV news channel NDTV carried a
report relating to a sting operation. The report concerned itself with the role of a
defence lawyer and the Special Public Prosecutor in an ongoing Sessions trial in
what is commonly called the BMW case. On 31st May, 2007 a Division Bench
of this Court, on its own motion, registered a writ Petition and issued a direction
to the Registrar General to collect all materials that may be available in respect
of the telecast and also directed NDTV to preserve the original material
including the CD/video pertaining to the sting operation. The question for our
consideration is whether Mr. R.K. Anand and Mr. I.U. Khan, Senior Advocates
and Mr. Sri Bhagwan Sharma, Advocate have committed criminal contempt of
Court or not. It was observed that prima facie their acts and conduct were
intended to subvert the administration of justice in the pending BMW case and
in particular to influence the outcome of the pending judicial proceedings.
Accordingly, in exercise of powers conferred by Article 215 of the Constitution
proceedings for contempt of Court (as defined in Section 2(c) of the Contempt
of Courts Act, 1971) were initiated against Mr. Anand, Mr. Khan and Mr. Sri
Bhagwan Sharma and they were asked to show because why they should not be
punished accordingly. Court said that Courts of law are structured in such a
design as to evoke respect and reverence for the majesty of law and justice. The
11
Appeal No. 156 of 2007
12
151 (2008) DLT 695 (Del., DB)
13
(2009) 8 SCC 106

30
machinery for dispensation of justice according to law is operated by the court.
Proceedings inside the courts are always expected to be held in a dignified and
orderly manner. The very sight of an advocate, who was found guilty of
contempt of court on the previous hour, standing in the court and arguing a case
or cross-examining a witness on the same day, unaffected by the contemptuous
behaviour he hurled at the court, would erode the dignity of the court and even
corrode the majesty of it besides impairing the confidence of the public in the
efficacy of the institution of the courts. This necessitates vesting of power with
the HC to formulate rules for regulating the proceedings inside the court
including the conduct of advocates during such proceedings. That power should
not be confused with the right to practise law. Thus court held that there may be
ways in which conduct and actions of an advocate may pose a real and
imminent threat to the purity of court proceedings cardinal to any court’s
functioning, apart from constituting a substantive offence and contempt of court
and professional misconduct. In such a situation the court does not only have
the right but also the obligation to protect itself. Hence, to that end it can bar the
advocate from appearing before the courts for an appropriate period of time. In
the present case since the contents of the sting recordings were admitted and
there was no need for the proof of integrity and correctness of the electronic
materials. Finally the Supreme Court upheld High Court’s verdict making
Anand guilty on the same count. On the other hand, the Supreme Court let off I
U Khan, who was found guilty by the High Court.

31
Attempt of Murder as Misconduct
In the case of Hikmat Ali Khan v. Ishwar Prasad Arya and Ors14, Ishwar
Prasad Arya, respondent No. 1, was registered as an advocate with the Bar
Council of Uttar Pradesh and was practising at Badaun. An incident took place
on May 18, 1971 during lunch interval at about 1.55 p.m., in which respondent
No. 1 assaulted his opponent Radhey Shyam in the Court room of Munsif or
Magistrate, Bisauli at Badaun with a knife. A pistol shot is also said to have
been fired by him at the time of incident. After investigation he was prosecuted
for offences under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the
Arms Act. The 1st Temporary Civil and Sessions Judge, by his judgment dated
July 3, 1972, convicted him of the said offence and sentenced him to undergo
rigorous imprisonment for three years for the offence under Section 307, I.P.C.
and for a period of nine months for offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act. 

On the basis of the said complaint disciplinary proceedings were initiated

against respondent No. 1 by the Bar Council of U.P. he was found guilty of
gross professional misconduct by taking the benefit himself of a forged and
fabricated document which had been prepared at his behest. The Disciplinary
Committee of the Bar Council of U.P. directed that respondent No. 1 be
debarred from practising as an advocate for a period of two years from the date
of the service of the order. Respondent No. 1 filed an appeal, the said appeal
was allowed by the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India by
order dated June 8, 1984 and the order of the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar
Council of U.P. dated January 30, 1982 was set aside on the view that there was
no material on the basis of which it could reasonably be held that respondent
No. 1 had prepared the document which was subsequently found forged. Further
the submission of Shri Markendaya was that having regard to the gravity of the

14
1997 RD-SC 87

32
misconduct of respondent No. 1 in assaulting his opponent in the Court room
with a knife and his having been committed the offence under Section 307,
I.P.C. and his being sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years
in connection with the said incident, the punishment of removal of the name of
respondent No. 1 from the roll of advocates should have been imposed on him
and that the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of U. P. was in error in
imposing the light punishment of debarring respondent No. 1 from practising as
an advocate for a period of three years only and that this was a fit case in which
the appeal filed by the appellant should have been allowed by the Disciplinary
Committee of the Bar Council of India. It was held that the acts of misconduct
found established are serious in nature. Under Sub-section (3) of Section 35 of
the Act the Disciplinary Committee of the State Bar Council is empowered to
pass an order imposing punishment on an advocate found guilty of professional
or other misconduct. Such punishment can be reprimand [Clause (b)],
suspension from practice for a certain period [Clause (c)] and removal of the
name of the advocate from the State roll of advocate [Clause (d)], depending on
the gravity of the mis-conduct found established. The punishment of removal of
the name from the roll of advocates is called for where the misconduct is such
as to show that the advocate is unworthy of remaining in the profession. In this
context, it may be pointed out that under Section 24(A) of the Act a person who
is convicted of an offence involving moral turpitude is disqualified for being
admitted as an advocate on the State roll of advocates. This means that the
conduct involving conviction of an offence involving moral turpitude which
would disqualify a person from being enrolled as an advocate has to be
considered a serious misconduct when found to have been committed by a
person who is enrolled as an advocate and it would call for the imposition of the
punishment of removal of the name of the advocate from the roll of advocates.
In the instant case respondent No. 1 has been convicted of the offence of
attempting to commit murder punishable under Section 307, IPC. He had

33
assaulted his opponent in the Court room with a knife. The gravity of the
misconduct committed by him is such as to show that he is unworthy of
remaining in the profession. The said mis-conduct, therefore, called for the
imposition of the punishment of removal of the name of respondent No. 1 from
the State roll of advocates and the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of
U. P., in passing the punishment of debarring respondent No. 1 from practising
for a period of three years, has failed to take note of gravity of the misconduct
committed by respondent No. 1. Having regard to the facts of the case the
proper punishment to be imposed on respondent No. 1 under Section 35 of the
Act should have been to direct the removal of his name from the State roll of
advocates. The appeal filed by the appellant, therefore, deserves to be allowed.
Finally court held that the respondents name should be removed from the rolls.

34
Strike As Misconduct
Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India 15, several Petitions raise the
question whether lawyers have a right to strike and/or give a call for boycotts of
Court/s. The petitioners submitted that strike as a mean for collective bargaining
is recognised only in industrial disputes. He submitted that lawyers who are
officers of the Court cannot use strikes as a means to blackmail the Courts or
the clients. He submitted that the Courts must take action against the Committee
members for giving such calls on the basis that they have committed contempt
of court. He submitted that the law is that a lawyer who has accepted a Vakalat
on behalf of a client must attend Court and if he does not attend Court it would
amount to professional misconduct and also contempt of court. He submitted
that Court should now frame rules whereby the Courts regulate the right of
lawyers to appear before the Court. He submitted that Courts should frame rules
whereby any lawyer who misconducts himself and commits contempt of court
by going on strike or boycotting a Court will not be allowed to practice in that
Court. He further submitted that abstention from work for the redressal of a
grievance should never be resorted to where other remedies for seeking
redressal are available. He submitted that all attempts should be made to seek
redressal from the concerned authorities. He submitted that where such
redressal is not available or not forthcoming, the direction of the protest can be
against that authority and should not be misdirected, e.g., in cases of alleged
police brutalities Courts and litigants should not be targeted in respect of actions
for which they are in no way responsible. He agreed that no force or coercion
should be employed against lawyers who are not in agreement with the “strike
call” and want to discharge their professional duties. Respondent submitted that
lawyers had a right to go on strike or give a call for boycott. He further
submitted that there are many occasions when lawyers require to go, on strike or
15
2003(1)ALLMR(SC)1169

35
gave a call for boycott. He submitted that this Court laying down that going on
strike amounts to misconduct is of no consequence as the Bar Councils have
been vested with the power to decide whether or not an Advocate has
committed misconduct. He submitted that this Court cannot penalise any
Advocate for misconduct as the power to discipline is now exclusively with the
Bar Councils. He submitted that it is for the Bar Councils to decide whether
strike should be resorted to or not. Petitioner further relied on the case of Lt.
Col. S.J. Chaudhary v. State (Delhi Administration)16, the HC had directed that
a criminal trial go on from day to day. Before this Court it was urged that the
Advocates were not willing to attend day to day as the trial was likely to be
prolonged. It was held that it is the duty of every advocate who accepts a brief
in a criminal case to attend the trial day to day. It was held that a lawyer would
be committing breach of professional duties if he fails to so attend.

In the case of K. John Koshy and Ors v. Dr. Tarakeshwar Prasad Shaw, 17
one of the questions was whether the Court should refuse to hear a matter and
pass an Order when counsel for both the sides were absent because of a strike
call by the Bar Association. This Court held that the Court could not refuse to
hear the matter as otherwise it would tantamount to Court becoming a privy to
the strike. Considering the sanctity of the legal profession the court had relied
on words said in case of “In Indian Council of Legal Aid and Advice v. Bar
Council of India,18 the SC observed thus : “It is generally believed that
members of the legal profession have certain social obligations, e.g., to render
“pro bono publico” service to the poor and the underprivileged. Since the duty
of a lawyer is to assist the court in the administration of justice, the practice of
law has a public utility flavour and, therefore, an advocate must strictly and
scrupulously abide by the Code of Conduct behoving the noble profession and
must not indulge in any activity which may tend to lower the image of the
16
(1984) Cri.L.J. 340
17
(1998) 8SCC 624
18
(1995) 1,SCR 304

36
profession in society. That is why the functions of the Bar Council include the
laying down of standards of professional conduct and etiquette which advocates
must follow to maintain the dignity and purity of the profession.”

In Re, Sanjeev Datta19, the SC has stated thus: “The legal profession is a
solemn and serious occupation. It is a noble calling and all those who belong to
it are its honourable members. Although the entry to the profession can be had
by acquiring merely the qualification of technical competence, the honour as a
professional has to be maintained by its members by their exemplary conduct
both in and outside the Court. The legal profession is different from other
professions in that what the lawyers do, affects not only an individual but the
administration of justice which is the foundation of the civilised society. Both as
a leading member of the intelligentsia of the society and as a responsible citizen,
the lawyer has to conduct himself as a model for others both in his professional
and in his private and public life. The society has a right to expect of him such
ideal behaviour. It must not be forgotten that the legal profession has always
been held in high esteem and its members have played an enviable role in public
life. The regard for the legal and judicial systems in this country is in no small
measure due to the tireless role played by the stalwarts in the profession to
strengthen them. They took their profession seriously and practice it with
dignity, deference and devotion. If the profession is to survive, the judicial
system has to be vitalised. No service will be too small in making the system
efficient, effective and credible.”

In the case of Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India, 20 it has

been held that professional misconduct may also amount to Contempt of Court.
It has further been held as follows: “An Advocate who is found guilty of
contempt of court may also, as already noticed, be guilty of professional
misconduct in a given case but it is for the Bar Council of the State or Bar
19
(1995) CriLJ 2910
20
(1998) 4 SCC 409

37
Council of India to punish that advocate by either debarring him from practice
or suspending his licence, as may be warranted, in the facts and circumstances
of each case. The learned Solicitor General informed us that there have been
cases where the Bar Council of India taking note of the contumacious and
objectionable conduct of an advocate, had initiated disciplinary proceedings
against him and even punished him for “professional misconduct”, on the basis
of his having been found guilty of committing contempt of court.”

Solicitation of Professional Work

Rajendra V. Pai V. Alex Fernandes and Ors 21 Court held that debarring a
person from pursuing his career for his life is an extreme punishment and calls
for caution and circumspection before being passed. No doubt probity and high
standards of ethics and morality in professional career particularly of an
advocate must be maintained and cases of proved professional misconduct
severely dealt with; yet, we strongly feel that the punishment given to the
appellant in the totality of facts and circumstances of the case is so
disproportionate as to prick the conscience of the Court. Undoubtedly, the
appellant should not have indulged into prosecuting or defending a litigation in
which he had a personal interest in view of his family property being involved.

21
AIR 2002 SC 1808

38
Breach of Trust By Misappropriating
the Assets Of Client
Harish Chandra Tiwari v. Baiju22, the court held on these fact, Appellant
Harish Chandra Tiwari was enrolled as an advocate with the Bar Council of the
State of UP in May 1982 and has been practising since then, mainly in the
courts at Lakhimpur Kheri District in UP. Respondent Baiju engaged the
delinquent advocate in a land acquisition case in which the respondent was a
claimant for compensation. The Disciplinary Committee has described the
respondent as “an old, helpless, poor illiterate person.” Compensation of Rs.
8118/- for the acquisition of the land of the said Baiju was deposited by the
State in the court. Appellant applied for releasing the amount and as per orders
of the court he withdrew the said amount on 2.9.1987. But he did not return it to
the client to whom it was payable nor did he inform the client about the receipt
of the amount. Long thereafter, when the client came to know of it and after
failing to get the amount returned by the advocate, compliant was lodged by
him with the Bar Council of the State for initiating suitable disciplinary action
against the appellant. Court held that among the different types of misconduct
envisaged for a legal practitioner misappropriation of the client’s money must
be regarded as one of the gravest. In this professional capacity the legal
practitioner has to collect money from the client towards expenses of the
litigation, or withdraw money from the court payable to the client or take money
of the client to be deposited in court. In all such cases, when the money of the
client reaches his hand it is a trust. If a public servant misappropriates money he
is liable to be punished under the present Prevention of Corruption Act, with
imprisonment which shall not be less than one year. He is certain to be
dismissed from service. But if an advocate misappropriates money of the client
there is no justification in de-escalating the gravity of the misdemeanour.
22
AIR 2002 SC 548

39
Perhaps the dimension of the gravity of such breach of trust would be mitigated
when the misappropriation remained only for a temporary period. There may be
justification to award a lesser punishment in a case where the delinquent
advocate returned the money before commencing the disciplinary proceedings.

Bribe as Misconduct
Shambhu Ram Yadav v. Hanuman Das Khatry23, the Court upheld the
order of bar council of India dated 31st July 1999, which held that the appellant
has served as advocated for 50 years and it was not expected of him to indulge
in such a practice of corrupting the judiciary or offering bribe to the judge and
he admittedly demanded Rs.10,000/- from his client and he orally stated that
subsequently order was passed in his client’s favour. This is enough to make
him totally unfit to be a lawyer by writing the letter in question. We cannot
impose any lesser punishment than debarring him permanently from the practice
.His name should be struck off from, the roll of advocates maintained by the Bar
Council of Rajasthan. Hereafter the appellant will not have any right to appear
in any Court of Law, Tribunal or any authority. Court imposed a cost of Rs.
5,000/- to the appellant which should be paid by the appellant to the Bar
Council of India which has to be within two months.

23
(2001) 6 SCC 1165

40
Rules of Bar Council of India
RULES ON AN ADVOCATE’S DUTY TOWARDS THE
COURT

1. Act in a dignified manner

During the presentation of his case, an advocate should act in a dignified

manner. He should at all times conduct himself with self-respect. However,
whenever there is proper ground for serious complaint against a judicial
officer, the advocate has a right and duty to submit his grievance to proper
authorities.

2. Respect the court

An advocate should always show respect towards the court. An advocate

has to bear in mind that the dignity and respect maintained towards judicial
office is essential for the survival of a free community.

3. Not communicate in private

An advocate should not communicate in private to a judge with regard to

any matter pending before the judge or any other judge. An advocate should
not influence the decision of a court in any matter using illegal or improper
means such as coercion, bribe etc.

4. Refuse to act in an illegal manner towards the opposition

An advocate should refuse to act in an illegal or improper manner

towards the opposing counsel or the opposing parties. He shall also use his

41
best efforts to restrain and prevent his client from acting in any illegal,
improper manner or use unfair practices in any mater towards the judiciary,
opposing counsel or the opposing parties.

5. Refuse to represent clients who insist on unfair means

An advocate shall refuse to represent any client who insists on using

unfair or improper means. An advocate shall excise his own judgment in such
matters. He shall not blindly follow the instructions of the client. He shall be
dignified in use of his language in correspondence and during arguments in
court. He shall not scandalously damage the reputation of the parties on false
grounds during pleadings. He shall not use unparliamentary language during
arguments in the court.

6. Appear in proper dress code

An advocate should appear in court at all times only in the dress

prescribed under the Bar Council of India Rules and his appearance should
always be presentable.

7. Refuse to appear in front of relations

An advocate should not enter appearance, act, plead or practice in any

way before a judicial authority if the sole or any member of the bench is
related to the advocate as father, grandfather, son, grandson, uncle, brother,
nephew, first cousin, husband, wife, mother, daughter, sister, aunt, niece,
father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, brother-in-law daughter-in-law or
sister-in-law.

42
8. Not to wear bands or gowns in public places

An advocate should not wear bands or gowns in public places other than
in courts, except on such ceremonial occasions and at such places as the Bar
Council of India or as the court may prescribe.

9. Not represent establishments of which he is a member

An advocate should not appear in or before any judicial authority, for or

against any establishment if he is a member of the management of the
establishment. This rule does not apply to a member appearing as “amicus
curiae” or without a fee on behalf of the Bar Council, Incorporated Law
Society or a Bar Association.

10.Not appear in matters of pecuniary interest

An advocate should not act or plead in any matter in which he has

financial interests. For instance, he should not act in a bankruptcy petition
when he is also a creditor of the bankrupt. He should also not accept a brief
from a company of which he is a Director.

11.Not stand as surety for client

An advocate should not stand as a surety, or certify the soundness of a

surety that his client requires for the purpose of any legal proceedings.

43
RULES ON AN ADVOCATE’S DUTY TOWARDS THE
CLIENT

1. Bound to accept briefs

An advocate is bound to accept any brief in the courts or tribunals or

before any other authority in or before which he proposes to practise. He
should levy fees which are at par with the fees collected by fellow advocates
of his standing at the Bar and the nature of the case. Special circumstances
may justify his refusal to accept a particular brief.

2. Not withdraw from service

An advocate should not ordinarily withdraw from serving a client once he

has agreed to serve them. He can withdraw only if he has a sufficient cause
and by giving reasonable and sufficient notice to the client. Upon withdrawal,
he shall refund such part of the fee that has not accrued to the client.

3. Not appear in matters where he himself is a witness

An advocate should not accept a brief or appear in a case in which he

himself is a witness. If he has a reason to believe that in due course of events
he will be a witness, then he should not continue to appear for the client. He
should retire from the case without jeopardising his client’s interests.

4. Full and frank disclosure to client

An advocate should, at the commencement of his engagement and during

the continuance thereof, make all such full and frank disclosure to his client
relating to his connection with the parties and any interest in or about the

44
controversy as are likely to affect his client’s judgement in either engaging
him or continuing the engagement.

5. Uphold interest of the client

It shall be the duty of an advocate fearlessly to uphold the interests of his

client by all fair and honourable means. An advocate shall do so without
regard to any unpleasant consequences to himself or any other. He shall
defend a person accused of a crime regardless of his personal opinion as to
the guilt of the accused. An advocate should always remember that his
loyalty is to the law, which requires that no man should be punished without
adequate evidence.

6. Not suppress material or evidence

An advocate appearing for the prosecution of a criminal trial should

conduct the proceedings in a manner that it does not lead to conviction of the
innocent. An advocate shall by no means suppress any material or evidence,
which shall prove the innocence of the accused.

7. Not disclose the communications between client and himself

An advocate should not by any means, directly or indirectly, disclose the

communications made by his client to him. He also shall not disclose the
advice given by him in the proceedings. However, he is liable to disclose if it
violates Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

8. An advocate should not be a party to stir up or instigate litigation.

9. An advocate should not act on the instructions of any person other
than his client or the client’s authorised agent.
10.Not charge depending on success of matters
45
 An advocate should not charge for his services depending on the success
of the matter undertaken. He also shall not charge for his services as a
percentage of the amount or property received after the success of the matter.

11.Not receive interest in actionable claim

An advocate should not trade or agree to receive any share or interest in

any actionable claim. Nothing in this rule shall apply to stock, shares and
debentures of government securities, or to any instruments, which are, for the
time being, by law or custom, negotiable or to any mercantile document of
title to goods.

12.Not bid or purchase property arising of legal proceeding

An advocate should not by any means bid for, or purchase, either in his
own name or in any other name, for his own benefit or for the benefit of any
other person, any property sold in any legal proceeding in which he was in
any way professionally engaged. However, it does not prevent an advocate
from bidding for or purchasing for his client any property on behalf of the
client provided the Advocate is expressly authorised in writing in this behalf.

13.Not bid or transfer property arising of legal proceeding

An advocate should not by any means bid in court auction or acquire by

way of sale, gift, exchange or any other mode of transfer (either in his own
name or in any other name for his own benefit or for the benefit of any other
person), any property which is the subject matter of any suit, appeal or other
proceedings in which he is in any way professionally engaged.

14.Not adjust fees against personal liability

46
 An advocate should not adjust fee payable to him by his client against his
own personal liability to the client, which does not arise in the course of his
employment as an advocate.

15. An advocate should not misuse or takes advantage of the confidence

reposed in him by his client.
16. Keep proper accounts

An advocate should always keep accounts of the clients’ money entrusted

to him. The accounts should show the amounts received from the client or on
his behalf. The account should show along with the expenses incurred for
him and the deductions made on account of fees with respective dates and all
other necessary particulars.

17.Divert money from accounts

An advocate should mention in his accounts whether any monies received

by him from the client are on account of fees or expenses during the course of
any proceeding or opinion. He shall not divert any part of the amounts
received for expenses as fees without written instruction from the client.

18.Intimate the client on amounts

Where any amount is received or given to him on behalf of his client, the
advocate must without any delay intimate the client of the fact of such
receipt.

19.Adjust fees after termination of proceedings

47
 An advocate shall after the termination of proceedings, be at liberty to
adjust the fees due to him from the account of the client. The balance in the
account can be the amount paid by the client or an amount that has come in
that proceeding. Any amount left after the deduction of the fees and expenses
from the account must be returned to the client.

20.Provide copy of accounts

An advocate must provide the client with the copy of the client’s account
maintained by him on demand, provided that the necessary copying charge is
paid.

21.An advocate shall not enter into arrangements whereby funds in his
hands are converted into loans.
22.Not lend money to his client

An advocate shall not lend money to his client for the purpose of any
action or legal proceedings in which he is engaged by such client. An
advocate cannot be held guilty for a breach of this rule, if in the course of a
pending suit or proceeding, and without any arrangement with the client in
respect of the same, the advocate feels compelled by reason of the rule of the
Court to make a payment to the Court on account of the client for the
progress of the suit or proceeding.

23.Not appear for opposite parties

48
 An advocate who has advised a party in connection with the institution of
a suit, appeal or other matter or has drawn pleadings, or acted for a party,
shall not act, appear or plead for the opposite party in the same matter.

RULES ON ADVOCATE’S DUTY TO OPPONENTS

1. Not to negotiate directly with opposing party

An advocate shall not in any way communicate or negotiate or call for

settlement upon the subject matter of controversy with any party represented
by an advocate except through the advocate representing the parties.

2. Carry out legitimate promises made

An advocate shall do his best to carry out all legitimate promises made to
the opposite party even though not reduced to writing or enforceable under
the rules of the Court.

RULES ON AN ADVOCATE’S DUTY TOWARDS FELLOW

ADVOCATES

1. Not advertise or solicit work

An advocate shall not solicit work or advertise in any manner. He shall

not promote himself by circulars, advertisements, touts, personal
communications, and interviews other than through personal relations,
furnishing or inspiring newspaper comments or producing his photographs to
be published in connection with cases in which he has been engaged or
concerned.

49
2. Sign-board and Name-plate

An advocate’s sign-board or name-plate should be of a reasonable size.

The sign-board or name-plate or stationery should not indicate that he is or
has been President or Member of a Bar Council or of any Association or that
he has been associated with any person or organisation or with any particular
cause or matter or that he specialises in any particular type of work or that he
has been a Judge or an Advocate General.

3. Not promote unauthorized practice of law

An advocate shall not permit his professional services or his name to be

used for promoting or starting any unauthorised practice of law.

4. An advocate shall not accept a fee less than the fee, which can be
taxed under rules when the client is able to pay more.
5. Consent of fellow advocate to appear

An advocate should not appear in any matter where another advocate has
filed a vakalat or memo for the same party. However, the advocate can take
the consent of the other advocate for appearing.

50
CHAPTER VII OF BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA RULES

Proceedings for removal of name from roll under proviso to Section 26 (1)
of the Act

1. Whenever a State Council, or any Committee duly authorised by the State

Council has credible information from any source whatever that an advocate on
the roll of the State Council has obtained his enrolment under circumstances
which, if established, will render his name liable to be removed by the Council
under the proviso to Section 26 (1) of the Act, it shall be the duty of the State
Council or the said Committee to enquire into the matter and report its findings
to the Council. In holding such enquiry the Council or the Committee shall hear
the advocate concerned and otherwise follow the principles of natural justice.

2. In disposing of any proceedings under the said proviso, whether instituted on

a report under Rule 1 or otherwise, the Council may, if it considers it just and
expedient, cause an enquiry into disputed questions of fact to be made by any
State Council or Committee thereof or any other Committee consisting of one or
more persons as it may deem fit. The State Council or the Committee, as the
case may be, shall follow the procedure mentioned in Rule 1.

51
State Bar Council and its Disciplinary
Committee
SECTION 35: PUNISHMENT OF ADVOCATES FOR
MISCONDUCT

Initiation and Procedure

It provides that the State Bar Council, on the receipt of the complaint, shall refer
the case for disposal to its disciplinary committee for inquiry. The disciplinary
committee is required to fix a date for hearing the case and issue a notice to the
advocate concerned and the Advocate General of the state.

Powers

After giving an opportunity of being heard, the disciplinary committee of the

State Bar Council may make any of the following orders:-

(a) dismiss the complaint or where the proceedings were initiated at the
instance of the State Bar Council, direct that the proceedings be filed.
(b) reprimand the advocate.
(c) suspend the advocate from practice for such period as it may deem fit.
(d) remove the name of the advocate from the State roll of advocates.
(e) where the advocate is suspended from practice, he/she is debarred from
practicing in any court or before any authority or person in India, during
the period of suspension.

52
SECTION 36-B: DISPOSAL OF DISCIPLINARY
PROCEEDINGS

This section provides that the committee shall dispose of the complaint
expeditiously and in each case the proceedings shall be concluded within a
period of one year from the date of the receipt of the complaint or the date of
the initiation of the proceedings at the instance of the State Bar Council, as the
case may be, failing which such proceedings shall stand to the remedy against
the order of punishment by the state bar council

SECTION 44: REVIEW OF ORDER BY DISCIPLINARY

COMMITTEE

The disciplinary committee of Bar Council may of its own motion or

otherwise review any order, within 60 days of the date of the order passed by it.
But to be effective it shall be approved by the Bar Council of India.

53
Role of Disciplinary Committee
ORGANISATION OF DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE

Section 9 of the Advocates Act, 1961, empowers the state Bar Councils to
constitute one or more Disciplinary Committees. Each of which shall consist of
three persons of whom two shall be persons elected by the Council from
amongst its members and the other shall be a person co-opted by the Council
from amongst advocates who possess the qualifications specified in the proviso
to sub-section (2) of section 3 and who are not members of the Council, and the
senior-most advocate amongst the members of a disciplinary committee shall be
the Chairman thereof.

ENQUIRY PROCEDURE OF DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE

The main function of the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council is to
enquire the complaints of professional misconduct against the Advocates award
suitable punishments. In the enquiry the following procedures prescribed under
Section 35 of the Advocates Act should be followed.24
1. On perusal of the complaint, if the Bar council is satisfied that it is a fit
case for enquiry then the complaint shall be referred for enquiry to the
Disciplinary Committee.
2. The Disciplinary Committee shall fix a date for enquiry and shall send
notice to the concerned Advocate and the Advocate General of the State.
3. The Advocate charged with the professional misconduct shall appear in
person or through the Lawyer. Similarly, the Advocate general also appear in
person or through a lawyer.

24
Rajendran, Kumar, Professional Ethics- Bar Bench Relation and Accountancy for Lawyers, Published on
Academia.edu, available at https://www.academia.edu/11790162/Professional_Ethics_for_Lawyers last referred
on April, 16, 2017.

54
 4. The Disciplinary Committee should complete the enquiry proceedings
within one year from the date of receipt of the complaint. Due to any reason, if
the enquiry was not completed within one year then the complaint should be
referred to the Bar Council of India for its disposal.
5. During the pendency of the enquiry if the term of the Disciplinary
Committee comes to an end then the successor committee shall continue the
enquiry.
6. After the enquiry due to the lack of majority opinion or otherwise if the
Disciplinary Committee was unable to take a final decision then they shall seek
the opinion of the chairman of the bar council and shall pass the final order
following his opinion.

POWERS OF DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF BAR

COUNCIL OF INDIA
The Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India shall have the
following powers:
1. It shall enquire the charges of the professional misconduct against
Advocates whose name is there in the roll of any of the State Bar Council.
2. Enquire the complaints in which the Disciplinary Committee of the State
Bar Council has not completed the enquiry within one year from the date of
receipt of the complaint.
3. Hear the appeal against the order of the State Bar Council.
4. Allowing the State Bar Council to review its own order.

55
POWERS OF DISCIPLINARY COMMITTEE OF STATE BAR
COUNCIL
Section 42 of the Advocates Act, 1961 deal with the powers of
Disciplinary Committee of State Bar Councils. It provides that the Disciplinary
Committee of the State Bar Council shall have the same powers same like the
civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 in respect of the following
matters. They are:
1. Summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining
him on oath.
2. Requiring discovery and production of any documents.
3. Receiving evidence on affidavit.
4. Requiring any public record or copies of any record from any court or
office.
5. Issuing commissions for the examinations of witness or documents. The
disciplinary committee has no right to require the attendance of the following
persons.
(i) Any presiding officer of the court.
(ii) Any officer of the revenue court.
A presiding officer of a court shall be summoned to attend the proceedings
of the Disciplinary Committee with permission of the High Court and an officer
of the revenue court shall be summoned with the permission of the State Govt.
All the proceedings before the Disciplinary Committee of a Bar Council
shall be deemed to a judicial proceedings within the meaning of S.193 & 228 of
I.P.C and every such disciplinary Committee shall be deemed to be a civil court.

56
Appeals
The aggrieved party may by order be able to file appeals to two
Authorities, Bar Council of India under Section 37 and Supreme Court under
Section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961.

APPEAL TO BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA

Section 37 of the Advocates Act, 1961, states that “(1) Any person
aggrieved by an order of the disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council
made under section 35 or the Advocate General of the State may, within sixty
days of the date of the communication of the order to him, prefer an appeal to
the Bar Council of India.
(2) Every such appeal shall be heard by the disciplinary committee of the
Bar Council of India which may pass such order (including an order varying the
punishment awarded by the disciplinary committee of the State Bar Council)
thereon as it deems fit.
Provided that no order of the disciplinary committee of the State Bar
Council shall be varied by the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of
India so as to prejudicially affect the person aggrieved without giving him
reasonable opportunity of being heard.@
Any person aggrieved by an order under Section 35 of the Advocate
General of the State may within 60 days of the date of the communication of the
order to him, prefer an appeal to the BCI. However, no order passed under
Section 35 can be varied so as to prejudicially affect the person aggrieved.

57
APPEALS TO SUPREME COURT
Section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961, states that, “Any person aggrieved
by an order made by the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India
under section 36 or section 37 or the Attorney-General of India or the
Advocate-General of the State concerned, as the case may be, may within sixty
days of the date on which the order is communicated to him, prefer an appeal to
the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court may pass such order (including an
order varying the punishment awarded by the disciplinary committee of the Bar
Council of India) thereon as it deems fit:
Provided that no order of the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of
India shall be varied by the Supreme Court so as to prejudicially affect the
person aggrieved without giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard.”
Any person aggrieved by an order made by the disciplinary committee of
the Bar Council of India under Section 36 or 37 or the Attorney General of
India or the Advocate-General of the state concerned, as the case may be, may
within 60 days of the date on which the order is communicated to him, prefer an
appeal to the Supreme Court. However, no order of the disciplinary committee
of the Bar Council of India shall be varied by the Supreme Court so as to
prejudicially affect the person aggrieved.

58
 Cases on Professional Misconduct
I. JAGADISH SINGH& ORS v. T.C.SHARMA25
Jagadish Singh and others were employees of the Central Board of
Education, New Delhi. They were arbitrarily dismissed from service by the
Board. They approached T.C. Sharma an Advocate to file a case against the
arbitrary dismissal. They paid Rs.1400 as fees for the case.
Sharma gave a fake case number starting that he has field the case before
the central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi. On verification it was found
that no such case has been field. Later they engaged another Advocate Mr.
Bhati to file the case and got a favourable order of reinstatement.
Therefore, they asked the return of Rs.1400 from T.C. Sharma. He refused
to pay the same. So, the complainant filed a petition against him before the
Delhi Bar Council alleging professional misconduct. Since Sharma failed to
appear during the enquiry, the state Bar Council could not able to dispose off
the case within one year. Hence, the case was transferred to the Bar Council of
India.
The Bar Council of India examined the petitioners, but the respondent was
absent. Finally the Bar council of India passed an order holding the respondent
guilty of professional misconduct and awarded the following punishments.
1. Suspended him from practice for a period of 5 years.
2. Directed him to return the Rs.1400/-with 12%interest per annum.
3. Directed to give Rs.500 as cost to the complainant.

25
BCI TR Case No.47/1990

59
II. BABLAL v. SUBASH JAIN26
The complainant and the Respondent are Advocates. The complainant filed
a petition before the Madhya Pradesh Bar Council stating that the respondent to
guilty of professional misconduct under Section 35. The allegation of the
complainant is that the respondent a practicing lawyer, is working as an Editor,
Printer and Publisher of a weekly called “Aaj Ki Janta”. He is the owner of the
press which prints the weekly. It is also alleged that the respondent did not
disclose these facts while applying for enrolment to the State Bar Council.
The respondent denied all the allegations. He contended that before
enrolment, the job of printing and publishing was transferred to his wife and
thereafter he was working only as an editor of the said weekly.
Since the enquiry was not completed within one year, the case was
transferred to the Bar Council of India.
In the enquiry it was found that he enrolled in 1973 and continued as the
printer, publisher and editor of the weekly till 1983. Only in 1983 printing and
publishing was transferred in the name of his wife. But, by a general power of
attorney from his wife the respondent was looking after the entire work of the
weekly. Based on these findings the Bar Council of India held that the
respondent is guilty of professional misconduct punishable under S.35 of the
Advocates Act and passed the following orders:
1. He was suspended from practice for a period of one year.
2. Suppression of the fact that he is the owner of the weekly in the
enrolment application cannot be treated as professional misconduct punishable
under S.35.

26
BCI TR Case No.115/1986

60
III. BASWAROOPONI v. BABULALSONI27
Babulalsoni is the father of Balswaroopsoni. He filed a complaint against
his son alleging professional misconduct before the Madhya Pradesh Bar
Council. The allegations are as follows:
1. A criminal case under S.307 I.P.C. is pending against him.
2. While appearing as a defence counsel for one munna in a criminal case
No.125/89 he has introduced his own brother as Dwarha Pradesh and arranged
him to stand as surety for munna.
3. He has withdrawn a sum of Rs.1500 deposited in the court in the name
of Babulalsoni in a civil case without his consent. Before the State Bar Council,
Babulalsoni personally appeared and produced certain documentary evidence in
support of his case but the present appellant did not appear though many
chances are given to him. Finally the Bar Council held that Balswaroopsoni is
guilty of professional misconduct and passed an order removing his name from
the Advocates Roll.
Against this order Balswaroopsoni filed an appeal the Bar Council of
India. In the appeal he denied all the allegations against him but, failed to
produce any documentary evidence in his support.
Regarding the second allegation he took a defence that munna brought one
person and introduced him as Dwarakha Prasad. Believing Munna’s words only
he also introduced him to the court as Dwarakha Prasad. This defence was not
accepted by the Bar Council of India because Balswaroopsoni knows that the
person brought by Munna Dwarakha Prasad.
Regarding the third allegation he took the defence that he is also one of the
plaintiffs in the said case and his father has given power to withdraw that
amount of Rs. 1500/.But no documentary evidence in support of this difference
was produced by him.

27
BCI DC Appeal No.25/1992

61
 After hearing the parties the Bar Council of India reduced the punishment
and suspended him from practice for a period of 5 years.

IV. INDURE LTD. v. DEO RAJ GUPTHA28

The complainant company is one of the highest producer of ash handling
system in the world, having large manufacturing and engineering factories. The
respondent was the Advocate of the company and various cases related to the
company was entrusted with him.
In April 1986 NELCO precisions, a company located at Faridabad gave a
false advertisement in the papers that Indure Ltd. is using the parts
manufactured by NELCO precisions.
To stop this false advertisement Indure Ltd. instructed the respondent to
serve a legal notice to NELCO. Notice was sent, but the notice has not given the
desired result. Therefore, the respondent was instructed to file a case against
NELCO. A plaint was prepared and it was approved by the petitioner company
and necessary court fees were also paid to him.
The respondent informed the complainant that he has filed the suit in the
Delhi High Court and got a stay order. In fact no suit had been filed.
The complainant filed a complaint in the Bar Council of U.P. alleging
professional misconduct against the respondent. They alleged that the
respondent had made a similar type of misrepresentation earlier also when he
was instructed to file a case against Anoel Industries Ltd. A criminal complaint
was also filed against Gupta in this regard.
The respondent filed a very brief counter and failed to give any
explanation about the serious allegation of professional misconduct. He simply
prayed that for the same matter there is already a criminal case pending against
him, so the Bar Council should not proceed with the complaint. When the

28
BCI TR Case No.58/1993

62
petition was pending before the Bar Council, the criminal case was disposed off
and he was convicted.
Since the U.P Bar Council could not able to complete the enquiry within
one year the petition was transferred to the Bar Council of India.
The Bar Council of India examined the complainant and the respondent
and finally came to the conclusion that the allegations against the respondent the
complainant has been proved beyond reasonable doubt and directed the removal
of his name from the roll of Advocates and prohibited him from practicing as an
Advocate.

63
V. COMMISONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES & CONSUMER
PROTECTION DEPT. v. BALAKRISHNAN29
Mr. Chandrakanth of Villupuram has filed a writ petition No.10589/90 in
the Madras High Court praying for the release of a Van TAH 4777 which was
ceased by the Special Thasildar, Dindivanam on 5- 7-1990. The writ petition
was dismissed on 11-7-1990.The respondent Mr. V. Balakrishnan was the
Advocate for Mr. Chandrakanth in the writ petition .After the dismissal of the
Writ petition. After the dismissal of the writ petition the respondent sent the
following telegram to the District Revenue Officer, South Arcot.
“High Court of Madras in writ petition No.10589/1990 filed by
Chandrakanth directed the District Revenue Officer to release the van TAH
4777 with 100 bags of paddy within one week. Do not sell the paddy. Detailed
order follows.”
In another writ petition No.6184/1990 the respondent sent the following
telegram to the Collector, South Arcot.
In writ petition No.6184/1990 filed by cuberan of villupuram for release of
117 bags of paddy the High Court has ordered notice of motion returnable on
11-6-90. Not to dispose the paddy till the final order in the writ petition.
A petition was filed against Mr. Balkrishnan before the State Bar Council
alleging professional misconduct. It is alleged that the contents of both these
telegrams were false and is not in consonance with the High Court order.
The State Bar Council gave benefit of doubt to the respondent by
observing that he acted with all enthusiasm to protect the interest of his client.
The State Bar Council observed that though his conduct is not praise worthy, it
did not amount to professional misconduct and thereby no punishment is
awarded to him.

29
DC Appeal No.15/1995

64
 Against this order an appeal was filed before the Bar Council of India.
After hearing both the parties, the Bar Council of India passed the followings
orders:
1. The order of the State bar Council was set aside.
2. He was found guilty of professional misconduct under S.35 of the Act.
3. The act sending wrong telegram misquoting the content of the court
order is not an act fit for an Advocate and he was reprimanded with strong
words.

65
VI. BANUMURTHY v. BAR COUNCIL OF ANDHRA PRADESH30
The appellant was a member of the Andhra Pradesh Judicial service. When
he was working as Metropolitan Magistrate at Hyderabad there were certain
allegations of corruption against him. A departmental enquiry was conducted
and e was served with an order of compulsory retirement and retired on 30-7-
1991.
After compulsory retirement he applied for resumption of practice. The
State Bar Council referred the matter to the Bar Council of India because he had
been found guilty by the departmental enquiry. The Bar Council of India
returned the matter to the Disciplinary Committee of the State Bar Council
found him guilty of professional misconduct and suspended him from practice
for a period of 2 years. Against this order the present appeal has been filed.
When the appeal was pending, he was allowed to resume his practice from
6-4-1994 by some court order. Bar Council of India continued the enquiry and
finally held that since 2 years has already lapsed since his punishment for
corruption charges, he shall resume his practice.

30
DC Appeal No.3/1994

66
VII. DR. D.V.P. RAJA v. D. JAYABALAN31
The appellant lodged a complaint with the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu
alleging that the respondent’s application in the form of complaints addressed to
various authorities amounts to professional to misconduct. The State Bar
Council passed a resolution that there is a prima facie case of professional
misconduct and it was placed before the Disciplinary committee of the State Bar
Council for its adjudication.
Before the Disciplinary Committee the respondent raised a preliminary
issue that the Disciplinary Committee has no jurisdiction in this matter because
there is no connection between his standing as lawyer and his representation to
various authorities. The Disciplinary Committee of the State Bar Council also
accepted this argument and dismissed complaint without going in to the merits
of the complaint. The Disciplinary Committee held that there was no nexus or
proximity in his standing as a lawyer and his to various authorities.
Against this order an appeal was filed before Bar Council of India. In the
Bar Council of India it was argued that the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu having
passed a resolution that there is a prima facie case against the respondent, the
Disciplinary Committee could not have dismissed the complaint without
hearing it on merits.
After hearing both the sides the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu has passed a
resolution that there is a prima facie case to be enquired in to by the
Disciplinary Committee has no power to consider the question of its jurisdiction
on the matter.
The decision of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu is good and valid.

31
BCI DC Appeal No.43/1996

67
VIII. G. M. HIRMANI v. ISWARAPPA32
The petitioner filed a complaint against the respondent. Mr. Iswarapa is a
practicing lawyer in the Bar Council of Karnataka alleging professional
misconduct on the following grounds.
1. The petitioner filed a partition suit against Grija Devi and Premadevi
(O.S.No.293/87). The respondent Mr. Iswarappa was the general power of
attorney holder of Smt. Girija Devi and Premadevi and also acted as Advocate
for them in the said case. He misused his position as an Advocate and
dominated the will of Girija Devi and Premadevi and purchased one portion of
the suit property on 30-3-93 from them.
2. On 4-6092 Mr.Iswarappa took the signature of kirmani in a ten rupee
bank bond paper promising to compromise the partition suit and thereafter
committed theft of the same bond paper.
3. During the pendency of the portion suit Mr. Iswarappa often visited the
house of the complainant in a drunken stage, through the complainant had asked
him not to visit his house during the pendency of the suit.
4. Iswarappa has falsely filed a criminal case against the complainant,
(C.C.No.12/93) which was dismissed after enquiry.
During the enquiry Iswarappa admitted that he was the general power of
attorney of Girija Devi and Premadevi and has purchased their property for
valuable consideration and paid the full amount and denied all other allegations.
The State Bar Council, after conducting a proper enquiry dismissed the
complaint. Thereafter, the complainant filed an appeal before the Bar Council of
India.
The Bar Council of India also dismissed the appeal on the following
grounds:
1. The complainant had failed to prove that Mr. Iswarappa took signature
of the complainant on a blank bond paper.
32
BCI DC Appeal No. 30/1995

68
 2. He has failed to prove that Iswarappa has purchased the property by
misusing his power of attorney.
3. He failed to prove that Iswarappa acted as an Advocate for Girija Devi
Premadevi in the partition suit. Iswarappa produced evidence that he never
acted as council of pemadevi and Girijadevi in the partition suit and one
Mr.AtchuthaGiri was the Advocate for them in that partition suit. Thus the
complainant had failed to establish a case of professional misconduct against
the respondent.

69
IX. N.S. (APPELLANT) v. K.V. (RESPONDENT)33
The appellant was a Govt. Pleader and the respondent was a Senior
Advocate of 33 years experience in the Madras High Court. On 12-11-1986
when he was going to the Bar Association, the appellant informed him that he
made a mention of a case before a Judge in which respondent was appearing for
the opposite party. The respondent told the appellant that he had not been
previously informed about it and that he has no notice that the appellant is going
to make a mention in the case, so “I will see to it”. Immediately the appellant
without any justification abused the respondent in a very bad manner using
vulgar words.
K.V. filed a complaint before the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu. N.S. denied
all the allegations, but admitted that heated exchange of words took place
between them. After examining both the parties, the Disciplinary Committee
found him guilty of professional misconduct and suspended him from practice
for a period of 6 months.
N.S. challenged this order before the Bar Council of India. The main
question in the appeal is whether the abusive language used by the appellant
against the respondent would amount to professional misconduct. The Bar
Council of India held that it amounts to professional misconduct but it held that
the suspension of N.S. from practice for a period of 6 months is not necessary
and reprimanded with strong words.

33
BCI DC Appeal No.14/198

70
X. P.R. (COMPLAINANT) v. V.I. (RESPONDENT)34
The complainant was the District Munsif Magistrate at Anakapalle from
19-11-84 to 8-4-85. The respondent was a practicing Lawyer there. The
respondent was the Advocate for a respondent in a maintenance case. On 29-10-
1985 when the case was called the Advocate as well as his client was absent, so
ex-party order was passed.
Therefore, the present respondent filed a contempt petition against the
complainant (P.R) in his court alleging the following things.
1. The High Court has passed transfer order to P.R. on 20-10- 1985 but,
instead of handing over the charge and obey the order he continued
there up to 8-11-1985 on certain protest (arranged by him).
2. The complainant was wasting valuable time of the court and also the
revenue of the Govt.
P.R. referred this contempt petition to the District Judge. District Judge
referred it to High Court. The court advised P.R. to lodge a complaint against
V.I. before the State Bar Council for professional misconduct. Hence P.R. filed
a complaint against the respondent alleging professional misconduct because he
has filed contempt petition on false grounds under his signature against the
presiding officer by name and bringing down the reputation of he presiding
officer. The respondent also acted on his own and not under the instruction of
his client. The Bar Council of Andhra Pradesh after enquiry held that by filing
the said contempt petition against the presiding officer with serious allegation,
the respondent has committed professional misconduct.
In the mean time the respondent was also selected and appointed as
District Munsif Magistrate and he ceased to be an Advocate. So, the Bar
Council expressed its inability to pass any order of punishment against him for
professional misconduct. So, they forward this order and other records to the
High Court of Andhra Pradesh for necessary action.
34
BCI TR Case No.101/1998

71
Cases on Contempt of Court
I. POWEN KUMAR SHARMA v. GURDIAL SINGH35
Sharma enrolled as an Advocate in the Punjab & Haryana Bar council in
January 1990. At the time of his enrolment his family was doing taxi business
and he himself having 4 taxies in his name. A complaint was filed against him
alleging professional misconduct that he is running taxi business.
Since the State Bar Council could not able to dispose off the complaint
within one year, it was transferred to the Bar Council of India.
Sharma denied this allegation and showed documents proving that he has
sold the Taxies after the enrolment. But the Bar Council of India did not accept
these documents and finally passed an order suspending him from practice for
one year for professional misconduct on the ground that he was running a taxi
business after enrolment.
He challenged the order before the Supreme Court contending that though
he had 4 taxies in his name before his enrolment he had sold the taxies after the
enrolment and discontinued the taxi business. The Supreme accepted the
argument and passed the following orders.
1. Simply because a person is the owner of the taxies, he cannot be treated
as directly doing the business.
2. Rule 47 of the bar Council permits an Advocate to act as a sleeping
partner in any business which is not inconsistent with any profession.
3. The charge of professional misconduct is a quasi-criminal charge, so it
should be proved beyond reasonable doubt. In this case the person filed the
complaint has failed to prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt.
4. The appellant has produced documents showing the sale of the taxies
after enrolment. The respondent has failed to prove that it is untrue.

35
AIR 1999 SC 98

72
 5. The order of the Bar Council of India is set aside because professional
misconduct is not approved.
II. MAHABIR PRASAD SINGH v. M/S JACK AVIATION36
The plaintiff filed a suit against the defendant for recovery of possession of
the building. During the pendency of the suit on 15-5-1998 the Delhi Bar
Association passed a resolution boycotting that court due to his improper
behaviour towards the lawyers. Taking advantage of this boycott resolution the
defendant filed a petition asking the judge to transfer the case, suo moto, to
another court because his advocate will not appear in the court In the future.
The transfer petition was dismissed.
This order was challenged before the High court. The High Court stayed
the proceedings and the case was adjourned for long period.
Aggrieved by the stay of proceedings and the long adjournment the
plaintiffs filed an appeal before the Supreme Court.
In the appeal the Supreme Court gave the following orders.
1. If any counsel does not want to appear in the court, that too for
justifiable reasons, the case should be returned to the party so that the party can
engage in another counsel.
2. Retaining the case without returning it to the client and abstaining from
conducting the case in the court amounts to professional misconduct.
3. The court should not adjourn the case on the ground of Advocates strike
or Advocates decision of boycott the court.
4. During the court hours even if the Advocates are not appearing the court
should proceed with the trial of the case.
5. Court should not yield to the pressure tactics of boycott or any kind of
brow beating.
6. Judicial officers should behave cardinally towards the Advocates.

36
AIR 1999 SC 287

73
III. SUPREME COURT BAR ASSOCIATION v. UNION OF INDIA 37
V.C. Mishra, then the Chair Man of the Bar Council of India was punished
by the Supreme Court for contempt of court and he was suspended from the
practice for a period of 3 years.
The charges against him were that in the court by using insulting,
disrespectful and threatening language he has threatened the judges. His act has
hurt the judges and he has acted in such way to obstruct the course of justice.
The Supreme Court Bar association challenged this order and raised the
following issues.
1. The Supreme Court while dealing with the contempt proceedings cannot
suspend Advocate from the practice.
2. Bar Council alone can pass the order suspending an Advocate from
practice.
3. For professional misconduct original jurisdiction is vested with the Bar
Council.
4. Supreme Court vested with only appellate jurisdiction to hear the appeal
against the order of the Bar Council of India.
5. Art. 129 of the constitution do not confer any original Jurisdiction to the
Supreme Court in the matters of professional misconduct.
The main question before the court was whether for contempt of court
committed by an Advocate the Supreme Court can pass an order suspending his
practice for a specified period.
The Constitution bench of the Supreme Court allowed the petition and
issued the following orders.
1. Supreme Court’s power to punish for contempt is quite wide, yet it is
limited.

37
AIR 1998 SC 1995

74
 2. In the contempt of the court proceedings, the court cannot
simultaneously enquire into the professional misconduct also by adopting
summery procedure.
3. Professional misconduct should be enquired only by following the
prescribed procedure mentioned in the Advocates Act.
4. Supreme Court can award punishment only for contempt of court and
not for professional misconduct.
5. For the contempt of the court, simple imprisonment of 6 weeks is given.
6. This punishment is suspended for 4 years.
7. The punishment shall be activated, if V.C. Misra again indulges in any
other act of contempt of court within the said period of 4 years.

75
IV. P.D. GUPTA v. RAMMURTHI38
One Mr. Krishnan died on 5-6-1980. His sister Vidyawati filed a suit for
declaration of title in her favour for certain properties of Mr. Krishnan,
Ramamurthi and others resisted the suit claiming title in their favour. P.D.Gupta
was the Advocate of Vidyawati. When the suit was pending P.D. Gupta
purchased part of the disputed property for Rs.18000 and sold it for 34000
immediately.
Mr. Ramamurthi filed a complaint against P. D. Gupta before the Delhi
Bar Council alleging professional misconduct. The main allegation is that he
has purchased the part of the disputed property from his client during the
pendency of the suit.
Since the enquiry was not completed within one year the matter is
transferred to the Bar Council of India. After hearing both the parties, the Bar
Council of India passed an order suspending him from the practice for a period
of one year. The court held that a shadow of undue influence is present when an
Advocate buys property of his own client.
Against this order P.D. Gupta filed an appeal before the Supreme Court. In
the appeal his main contention was that his client or her legal heirs has not filed
any complaint regarding professional misconduct, and the enquiry conducted
based on the complaint by some other person is wrong.
The Supreme Court did not accept this argument and passed the following
orders.
1. Any person shall file a complaint regarding professional misconduct
against an Advocate.
2. Bar council shall enquire into the allegation of professional misconduct,
though the complaint is filed by a stranger, because, the Bar council is
concerned with the conduct of Advocates.
3. The order passed by the Bar Council of India is confirmed.
38
AIR 1998 SC 283

76
 V. ROBTAS SINGH v. COMMISSIONER, AGRA DIVISION39
The commissioner of Agra Division, and certain other officials have
violated the order of Allahabad High Court dated 6-9-93.
Consequently the Allahabad High court issued notice to show cause why
action cannot be taken against them for contempt of court. In this matter the
additional standing counsel of the State Mr. Kazim appeared for the officials.
An objection was raised by the State law Officer and some criminal
Advocates, regarding the appearance of the govt. Standing counsel for the
accused in the contempt of court proceedings.
In support of their claim they submitted the Legal Remuneration Manual of
U.P which deals with the duties of a Govt. Advocate. It says that the
Government Advocate shall not appear for the defence or any criminal or quasi-
criminal case; nor shall he advise any party against the prosecution in any
criminal case. After hearing the objection the Allahabad high Court passed the
following orders.
1. Contempt proceedings are quasi-criminal in nature so it is the duty of
the state to prosecute the contemnor even if they are govt. officials.
2. Govt. Advocates should not appear for the persons charged with the
contempt of court.
3. Govt. officials should engage other Advocates in the contempt
proceedings and they should pay for them from their pocket.
4. If the Govt. officials are acquitted then they shall claim the amount spent
by them for spending the case from the Govt.

39
AIR 1997 All 278

77
VI. HARISH CHANDRA SINGH v. S.N. TRIPATHI40
Mr. Daya Ram engaged Mr. Harish Chandra as a lawyer in a consolidation
proceeding pending before the consolidation officer. Since Daya Ram could not
attend the case regularly, Harish Chandra asked him to appoint a Mukhtar.
Daya Ram appointed one Mr. Syed Hussain, a junior Advocate of Harish
Chandra as the Mukhtar (power agent).
Syed Hussain in the capacity as Mukhtar sold certain properties of Daya
Ram to the father of Harish Chandra (This he did under the pressure of his
senior Harish Chandra).
Daya Ram filed a complaint against both Harish Chandra and his junior
Syed Hussain before the Local Bar Association. The president of the Bar
Association forwarded the complaint to the U.P. State Bar Council. Since the
matter was not disposed off within one year it was transferred to the Bar
Council of India. During the enquiry Daya Ram submitted the following.
1. The Mukhtar was obtained fraudulently.
2. Therefore, the sale deed executed by using the Mukhtar should be
treated as void.
3. The act of Harish Chandra and Syed Hussain amounts to professional
misconduct, so they should be punished for that.
Syed Hussain confessed the guilt stating that being a junior, by obeying his
senior he did these things and asked for pardon.
Harish Chandra contented that his father was living separately and he did
not have any contact with him. He also contended that Syed Hussain is not his
junior.
The Bar Council of India held that Harish Chandra is Guilty of
professional misconduct and he was suspended from the practice for two years.
His junior Syed Hussain was pardoned.

40
AIR 1997 SC 879

78
 Against this order Harish Chandra filed an appeal before the Supreme
Court. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the
Bar Council of India.
VII. HIKMAT ALIKHAN v. ISHWAR PRASAD ARYA41
Ishwar Prasad Arya was an Advocate practicing in Badann, U.P. He
stabbed his opponent with the knife for that he has convicted 3 years rigorous
imprisonment. On appeal the High court also confirmed the punishment.
Thereafter, by using a forged letter of the Governor asking the court to
suspend his sentence under Article 161 of the constitution he got his conviction
suspended and he was released. Later the sessions Judge found the letter as
forged one and he lodged a complaint with the Bar Council of U.P. for
necessary action against him. The State Bar Council debarred him from practice
for 2 years. On appeal the Bar Council of India set aside this order on the
ground that there is no clear evidence to show that the Advocate himself has
prepared that forged letter. Subsequently by taking into account of the bad
conduct of the Advocate i.e. Conviction for the offence under Section 307 of
Indian Penal Code and his name being entered by the police in a register which
contains the list of persons with bad character he was debarred for the practice
for a period of 3 years by the State Bar Council. On appeal this order was also
set aside by the Bar Council of India because it is interconnected with the earlier
matter. Hikmit Ali Khan preferred an appeal before Supreme Court against this
order. The Supreme Court held that the second order of the State Bar Council
was based on totally a different ground not connected with the grounds of the
first order and the Bar Council of India was erroneous in setting aside the
second order of the U.P. Bar Council. Further Supreme Court held that the
gravity of the misconduct committed by him is so serious and the punishment of
suspending him from practice for 3 years is not sufficient and ordered the
removal of his name from the roll of Advocates.
41
AIR 1977 SC 864

79
VIII. PRAHALAD SARAN GUPTA v. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA42
Gupta was practicing Advocate at Ghaziabad. He was appearing for the
decree-hold in an execution case between Atma Ram Manak Chand v.Shriram
in the Ghaziabad court.
The degree holder has filed a complaint in the State Bar Council against
his Advocate (Gupta) alleging the following professional misconduct.
1. He has colluded with the judgement debtor and accepted Rs. 1500 out of
the total decreed amount and allowed time for the payment of the remaining
balance.
2. The amount so received is not given to the degree holder.
3. He has helped the judgement Debtor to get the execution stayed by the
High Court.
4. When he was acting as a standing counsel for the railways, he drafted
the notice under S.80.C.P.C to be served to the railways on behalf of M/s.
Agarwal traders who was the compliment against the Railways. This is a serious
professional misconduct.
The draft prepared by his own handwriting was produced before the
disciplinary committee.
Gupta denied all the allegations and informed that he was holding the
amount of Rs.1500 as trustee on behalf of his client. Since the enquiry was not
completed within one year the matter was transferred to the Bar Council of
India.
The Bar Council of India had found the appellant guilty of serious
professional misconduct and passed an order suspending him from the practice
for a period of one year.
Gupta challenged this order before the Supreme Court. The Supreme court
passed the following orders.

42
AIR 1997 SC 1338

80
 1. It is not advisable for the Disciplinary Committee to base its conclusion
purely on the basis of its own comparison of the hand writing of Gupta with the
alleged draft prepared by him. The court held that the charge of professional
misconduct is quasi-criminal in nature requires proof beyond reasonable doubt.
2. Addressing a letter to the counsel of the opposite party (judgement
debtor) in the execution proceedings amounts to professional misconduct.
3. Holding the money with him which he has received in the execution
proceedings without any sufficient reason amounts to professional misconduct.
4. For this misconduct suspending him from practice for 1 year is too
much, so the Bar Council of India’s order is set aside and he was reprimanded
with strong words.

81
IX. DR. HANIRAJ L. CHULANI v. BAR COUNCIL OF
MAHARASHTRA43
Dr. Haniraj was a medical practitioner studied law and wanted to enrol as
an Advocate and to continue the medical profession also. He applied to the Bar
Council of Maharashtra to enrol himself as an advocate. The State Bar Council
rejected his application because the Bar Council rules prohibit a person to enrol
as an Advocate if he is already carrying on some other profession.
He challenged this rule before the High Court and prayed for an order to
declare that the said rule as arbitrary, unreasonable and violative of Art 21. The
High Court summarily dismissed the petition. Thereafter he filed a special leave
petition before the Supreme Court.
In the Supreme Court he submitted the following arguments
1. Advocates act has delegated excessive and unlimited power of rule
making power to the Bar Council. This is against the principles of rules of law.
2. Rules made by the Bar Council by using this delegation should be
declared as void.
3. He should be treated equally along with the other law graduates.
4. The protection of equality before law should be given to him (Art 14).
The Supreme Court has not accepted these arguments and dismissed the
petition and passed the following orders.
Bar Council is justified in framing rules prohibiting persons carrying on
the other business to enrol as an Advocate.
1. Legal profession requires full time attention hence an Advocate cannot
be allowed to do any other business or profession.
2. Bar Council rules intervenes to the constitution and it is not violative of
Articles 14, 19(1) (g) and 21.

43
AIR 1996 SC 1708

82
 X. DR. D. C. SAXENA v. HON’BLE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA44
Dr. D. C. Saxena was a professor of English University. He filed a writ
petition in the Supreme Court by way of public interest litigation seeking to
recover from the Prime Minister Mr. P. V. Narasima Rao the expenditure
incurred for his private use of Indian Air Force Air Craft and Helicopters. The
writ petition was dismissed summarily without going into the merits by the
bench consisting of Hon’ble chief Justice Mr. A.M. Ahmedi and others.
Thereafter, Dr. D.C. Saxena filed a second writ petition against the chief
justice of India. In this petition he contended that his first writ petition was
dismissed by Chief Justice by receiving brief and he prayed for the following.
1. The respondent be declared as unfit to hold the office of Chief Justice of
India.
2. His citizenship should be withdrawn and a case be registered against
him for forgery and fraud.
3. Direction to prosecute the Respondent under the prevention of
Corruption Act.
4. Direction to the Chief Justice of India to give from his pocket the
expenses incurred for filling this writ petition.
The Supreme Court issued a show cause notice against him for contempt
of court because several averments in the writ petition are scandalous, and the
allegation made are reckless attack on the Chief Justice of India.
Saxena denied all the allegations. He pleaded that he had filed this petition
only on public interest and there is no bad intention in filing this petition. He
even pleaded that if the court wants, he is ready to withdraw the petition or
ready to make the necessary changes in the petition.
The court did not accept this argument and held that withdrawal or making
changes in the petition cannot cure the contempt already committed by the
scandalous remarks made in the petition. The court passed an order of three
44
AIR 1996 SC 2481

83
months simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2000 for contempt of court and
the writ petition was also dismissed.

84
Conclusion
The role of the lawyers in the society is of great importance. They being
part of the system of delivering justice holds great reverence and respect in the
society. Each individual has a well defined code of conduct which needs to be
followed by the person living in the society. A lawyer in discharging his
professional assignment has a duty to his client, a duty to his opponent, a duty
to the court, a duty to the society at large and a duty to himself. It needs a high
degree of probity and poise to strike a balance and arrive at the place of
righteous stand, more so, when there are conflicting claims. While discharging
duty to the court, a lawyer should never knowingly be a party to any deception,
design or fraud. While placing the law before the court a lawyer is at liberty to
put forth a proposition and canvas the same to the best of his wits and ability so
as to persuade an exposition which would serve the interest of his client and the
society.
The advocate, as an office of the Court, also has the responsibility to
render services of sound quality. Lapses in services in the nature of absence
when the matters are called out, the filing of incomplete and inaccurate
pleadings many times even illegible and without personal check and
verification, the non- payment of court fees and process fees, the failure to
remove office objections, the failure to take steps to serve the parties are not
merely professional omission. They amount to positive dis-service to the
litigants and create embarrassing situation in the court leading to avoidable
unpleasantness and delay in the delay in the disposal of matters, and
detrimentally affects the entire judicial system.
Furthermore, as the officers of the court the lawyers are required to uphold
the dignity of the judicial office and maintain a respectful attitude towards the
Court. This is because the Bar and the Bench form a noble and dynamic
partnership geared to the great social goal of administration of justice, and the
85
mutual respect of the Bar and the Bench is essential for maintaining cordial
relations between the two. It is the duty of an advocate to uphold the dignity and
decorum of the Court and must not do anything to bring the Court itself into
disrepute, and ensure that at no point of time, he oversteps the limits of
propriety.

86
Bibliography
 Malhi, Amanjot, Conflict Between Interests, and Duties of a Lawyer,
available at http://www.legalserviceindia.com/article/l241-Conflict-
between-Interest-and-Duties-of-a-Lawyer-.html
 Rules on Professional Standards, available at
http://www.barcouncilofindia.org/about/professional-standards/rules-on-
professional-standards/
 Saini, Ekta, Professional Misconduct by lawyers in India, published on Jan.
14, 2014, available at
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/professional-misconduct-
by-lawyers-in-india-1621-1.html
 Bar Council of India Rules, Under the Advocates Act, 1961.
 Singh, Arminder, Supreme Court on Contempt by Advocates, available at
http://www.legalserviceindia.com/articles/sc_t.htm
 Lawfarm Team, Duties of Advocates on Bar Council Rules, published on
Sept. 07, 2016, available on http://lawfarm.in/blogs/duties-of-advocates-
bar-council-rules
 Bar Council of Delhi, Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette,
available on http://delhibarcouncil.com/wp/wp-
content/uploads/2012/01/Etiqquetes.pdf
 Peter, Dr. Elbe, Professional Misconduct of Lawyers in India, published on
June 06, 2014, available on
http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/print.php?art_id=1665
 Kumar, Rajendran, Professional Ethics for Lawyers, available on
https://www.academia.edu/11790162/Professional_Ethics_for_Lawyers
 Sreeraj K.V., Professional Misconduct under the Advocates Act, 1961,
published on July 24, 2016, available on
https://blog.ipleaders.in/professional-misconduct-advocates-act-1961/
87
 Rules on Professional Misconduct, The Bar Council of India, available on
http://www.barcouncilofindia.org/about/professional-standards/rules-on-
professional-standards/

88