"How Can Member Of Bar Claim To Be Both A Freelance Journalist & An Advocate?" Apex Court Calls It Highly Unprofessional
|The Supreme Court, while hearing a plea filed by Advocate Mohd. Kamran, raised concerns over his simultaneous roles as a freelance journalist and practicing lawyer. Kamran had initiated a defamation case against former BJP MP Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh.
The Bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Augustine George Masiah expressed unease about Kamran's professional conduct, questioning how he could ethically hold both roles at the same time.
During the hearing, Justice Oka inquired why the Bar Council had not responded to the issue and emphasized the need for clarity.
The Court referred to an earlier order dated July 29, 2024, directing the Registry to issue fresh notice to both the Bar Council of India and the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh, with the matter returnable on November 29, 2024. "As per order dated 29.07.2024, Registry to issue fresh notice to BCI and Bar Council of State of Uttar Pradesh, returnable on November 29," the Court ordered.
Justice Oka noted, "How can a member of the Bar claim to be both a freelance journalist and an Advocate? This is highly unprofessional." He further urged Kamran’s counsel to seek instructions from the petitioner, stating that Kamran must clarify whether he wishes to continue as a lawyer or a journalist, as holding both positions simultaneously was inappropriate.
"How can a member of the Bar say that I am working as a freelance journalist as well as the member of the bar? He has to make a statement; either he has to be an Advocate or he has to be a freelance journalist. He can't have it both ways. You please take instructions," the Court said.
The Court remarked that if Kamran chooses one profession, the issue of the Bar Council addressing his conduct would not arise. "If you are able to make that statement, the issue of the Bar Council to deal with your conduct will not arise," the Bench said.
It is to be noted that on July 29, the Court had said, "We have perused the complaint under Section 200 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, filed by the petitioner. At various places, the petitioner claims that he is a practicing Advocate and a Freelance State Accredited Journalist. This conduct needs to be looked into by the Bar Council of State of Uttar Pradesh as well as the Bar Council of India. The Bar Councils will have to consider whether the rules of professional ethics permit this."
"Registry to forward a copy of complaint at Annexure ‘P-8’ to the State Bar Council as well as the Bar Council of India for taking necessary action along with a copy of this Order," the Court had directed.
Cause Title: Mohd. Kamran v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. [SLP(Crl) No. 9615/2024; Diary No. 28200 / 2024]