The Delhi High Court, in response to a suo motu contempt petition initiated following concerns about the authenticity of a document believed to be an order by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB), has directed the Bar Council of Delhi to investigate and take appropriate action against an Advocate.

During the earlier proceedings, the defendants had handed over a compilation of documents to a Single Judge, including a document believed to be a copy of an order by the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB). Subsequently, concerns were raised about the authenticity of this document, leading to the Single Judge directing an inquiry into its authenticity.

The Single Judge had concluded, based on the inquiry report, that no records were available for the alleged IPAB order. The Single Judge, invoking Section 18 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, had referred the matter to the Chief Justice for consideration by an appropriate Division Bench.

A Division Bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Shalinder Kaur ordered, “We hereby direct the Bar Council of Delhi to take appropriate action, as per law against the said Mr. Sanjay Aggarwal, Advocate, if, he is found guilty of manufacturing the order dated 02.03.2016 purported to be by IPAB.”

Senior Advocate N. Hariharan appeared as an Amicus Curiae and Advocates Prashant Mehta, Raghav Marwah and Vidit Gupta appeared for the Respondents.

Respondent No. 1 tendered an unconditional apology, explaining how they came into possession of the document and expressed belief in its authenticity at the time.

The Court accepted the apology, discharged the respondents from the contempt proceedings, and directed the Bar Council of Delhi to take appropriate action against the advocate who provided the document if found guilty of manufacturing it.

The case was thus disposed of.

Cause Title: Court On Its Own Motion v. Vicky Aggarwal & Ors.

Click here to read/download Judgment



Delhi High CourtJustice Suresh Kumar KaitJustice Shalinder Kaur

Suchita Shukla