Mark Appearances Of Only Those Advocates Who Are Authorised To Appear & Argue A Case On A Particular Day Of Hearing: SC Directs AoRs
The Supreme Court directed Advocates on-Record to mark the appearances of only those Advocates who are authorised to appear and argue the case on the particular day of hearing.
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) to give such names on each day of the hearing of the case as instructed in the Notice.
A Bench of Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma observed, “It is directed that the Advocates on-Record may mark the appearances of only those Advocates who are authorized to appear and argue the case on the particular day of hearing. Such names shall be given by the Advocate on Record on each day of hearing of the case as instructed in the Notice. If there is any change in the name of the arguing Advocate, it shall be duty of the concerned Advocate-on-Record to inform the concerned Court Master in advance or at the time of hearing of the case. The concerned Officers/Court Masters shall act accordingly.”
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 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 explained that so far as the listing of the names of the Advocates in the Order Sheets is concerned, they would be neither appearing as an AOR nor as arguing/ Senior Counsel, it was submitted by the concerned officers i.e. AR-cum-PS/Court Masters inter alia that the Advocate on Records have been authorised to put in appearance of the Advocates appearing with or on his/her behalf on the portal for filing online appearance slips in view of Office Circular
“It is further stated that it is not possible for the Court Masters to recognize every Advocate appearing in the Court rooms by face and therefore, they have to rely upon the appearance put in by the Advocates-onRecord. In case a Senior Advocate is appearing but his/her name is not reflected in the appearance slip, the Court Masters include their names,” the Court noted.
The Bench explained that the Notice only permitted the AoR to mark the appearances of the Advocates appearing in the Court, through the link provided on the website or on the office mobile app of the Supreme Court. “Meaning thereby, the Advocate on Record may mark the appearances of those Advocates who are actually appearing in the case i.e. the Advocate-on Record and the Advocates who are going to appear and argue the case on a particular day of hearing,” the Court stated.
“The Notice nowhere permits the Advocates-on-Record to mark appearances of the Advocates who are not authorized either to appear and argue the case,” 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
