AOR Role Very Important: Supreme Court To Consider Framing Guidelines For Conduct Of Advocates-on-Record
|The Supreme Court said it will frame guidelines for the conduct of Advocates-on-Record (AORs).
The Court sought assistance from the Supreme Court AOR Association in this regard and appointed Senior Advocate S. Murlidhar as amicus curiae.
The Court was hearing a Special Leave Petition in a criminal case against a Delhi High Court, in the process of which certain facts were suppressed by the appearing advocates.
The Division Bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih said, "A very important role has been assigned to Advocates-on-Record, as no litigant can seek redressal of his grievance before this Court without engaging an Advocate-on-Record. It is, therefore, necessary to consider of framing guidelines for the conduct of the Advocates-on-Record."
Senior Advocate Meenakshi Arora appeared for Senior Advocate Rishi Malhotra, Senior Advocate Prashant Bhushan appeared for a complainant.
The case pertains to the conviction of a person by the Trial Court, sentencing him to undergo a sentence of 30 years. “The High Court interfered with the said order. Thereafter, this Court… restored the judgment of the Trial Court by specifically observing that the petitioner will undergo life sentence for 30 years without remission. These facts were suppressed while filing this Special Leave Petition,” the Supreme Court noted in an Order on September 2, 2024.
The Court, in that Order said, while there was a reference to an Order of conviction, it was not disclosed that of sentence was for a fixed term of 30 years. The Court called it a “very serious and gross case of material misrepresentation made while filing the Special Leave Petition.” The Court asked the Registry to issue notice to AOR Jaydip Pati. Pati was directed to file an affidavit explaining his conduct.
The matter was heard again on September 30 and the Bench noted that AOR Jaydip Pati had filed an affidavit, calling its contents “to say the least, shocking.” The Court, however, said it would deal with the stand taken by him later. On that day, the Court issued notice to Senior Advocate Rishi Malhotra, who had appeared as the standing counsel in the matter, asking him to explain the contents of the affidavit filed by Pati.
The Court also stated that it has noticed in “at least” half a dozen cases “blatant false statements were made in Writ Petitions and Special Leave Petitions” filed seeking relief of premature release of convicts. The Court requested the President, Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) to assist the Court.
On September 21, the Court perused the affidavit filed by Malhotra and appeared to be dissatisfied with its contents. The Bench took on record Arora’s statement that a “better affidavit” will be filed. "We have perused the affidavit of Mr. Rishi Malhotra, the learned senior counsel. Ms. Meenakshi Arora, the learned senior counsel representing him states that a better affidavit will be filed."
The Court noted that the present case "raises issues of great concern, insofar as the responsibility of Advocates-on Record of this Court is concerned." It continued, "Apart from the dispute between a senior and his junior, as is reflected from the affidavits filed on record, the issue of concern is of the conduct of the Advocate-on-Record, especially in the light of explanation (a) to Rule 10 of Order IV of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013."
Rule 10 Order 4 Explanation (a) states that “mere name lending by an advocate-on-record without any further participation in the proceedings of the case” shall be considered as misconduct or conduct unbecoming of an Advocate-on-Record.
Copies of the entire proceedings, including affidavits, were directed to be forwarded to the amicus curiae. The Court said "it would be appropriate" if the office-bearers of the SCAORA interact with the appointed amicus curiae so that they are able to come out with agreed guidelines.
The Court listed the matter for further hearing on November 11, 2024.
Cause Title: Jitender alias Kalla v. State (Govt.) Of NCT of Delhi And Anr. [SLP(Crl) 4299/2024]
Appearance: Senior Advocate Meenakshi Arora for Senior Advocate Rishi Malhotra