Advocates' Conduct Must Conform To BCI Rules Of Conduct & Etiquettes; No Legal Professional Is Immune From Prosecution For Criminal Misdeed: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court observed that an advocate's conduct must conform to the Rules of Conduct and Etiquettes of Bar Council of India.
The Court also added that no legal professional is immune from prosecution for his/her criminal misdeeds.
The Court ordered the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to investigate allegations of serious professional misconduct by advocates for filing false and fabricated documents. The Bench further directed that the Advocates on Record (AOR) can only mark the appearances of those Advocates who are authorised to appear and argue the case on the particular day of hearing.
A Bench of Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma observed, “There is a great sanctity attached to the proceedings conducted in the court. Every Advocate putting his signatures on the Vakalatnamas and on the documents to be filed in the Courts, and every Advocate appearing for a party in the courts, particularly in the Supreme Court, the highest court of the country is presumed to have filed the proceedings and put his/her appearance with all sense of responsibility and seriousness. No professional much less legal professional, is immuned from being prosecuted for his/her criminal misdeeds.”
Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave represented the appellant, while Advocate Sanchar Anand appeared for the respondents.
Back in 2013, an FIR was lodged by the appellant accusing several individuals, including his son-in-law and daughter of kidnapping his minor daughter under Sections 363, 366, and 376 of the IPC. Following a series of court proceedings, the Allahabad High Court quashed the entire proceedings in relation to the supplementary chargesheet filed in the case in 2018. However, the appellant filed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court, challenging the High Court's judgment.
However, the appellant-Bhagwan Singh informed the Supreme Court in 2024 that he had never authorised or instructed anyone to file the SLP on his behalf. He further alleged that his signature on the vakalatnama and other legal documents was forged. In his complaint, the appellant stated that he had no knowledge of the filing, pendency, or dismissal of the application under Section 482 of the CrPC before the Allahabad High Court.
The Supreme Court observed, “From the aforesaid state of affairs, we are of the opinion that the Respondents with the able assistance of a battery of advocates in the Supreme Court…and a battery of Advocates in the High Court…and many other unknown persons had made brazen attempts to falsely implicate the Respondent No.2 by filing false proceedings in the name of Bhagwan Singh in the High Court and Supreme Court, by filing false and fabricated documents.”
The Bench stated that to create or to assist in creating false documents and to use them as genuine knowing them to be false in the Court proceedings, to falsely implicate somebody in the false proceedings filed in the name of the person who had no knowledge whatsoever about the same are the acts attributable to the offences punishable under the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
“The matter assumes serious concern when the Advocates who are the officers of the Court are involved and when they actively participate in the ill-motivated litigations of the unscrupulous litigants, and assist them in misusing and abusing the process of law to achieve their ulterior purposes,” the Court remarked.
The Bench reminded the Advocates about the Standard of Professional Misconduct and Etiquettes as contained in Chapter II Part VI of the Bar Council of India Rules.
Consequently, the Court observed, “Though an Advocate is expected to fearlessly uphold the interests of his client, his conduct must conform to the Rules of Conduct and Etiquettes laid down in the said Chapter, both in letter and in spirit.”
Accordingly, the Supreme Court listed the matter for the submission of the Report by the CBI on 25th November, 2024.
Cause Title: Bhagwan Singh v. State Of U.P. & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 708)
Appearance:
Appellant: Senior Advocate Siddhartha Dave; Advocates Jemtiben AO and Nikhil Majithia; AOR Anubhav and Rishi Kumar Singh Gautam
Respondents: Advocates Sanchar Anand, Harsh Pratap Shahi, and Shiv Kumar; AOR Sakshi Kakkar, Apoorva Singhal and Varinder Kumar Sharma
