New Delhi: For Senior advocates R K Anand and I U Khan, facing the ignominy of being barred from practising in the Delhi High Court (HC) after being held guilty of contempt of court for trying to influence a BMW case witness, this stinging observation from Supreme Court (SC) on Monday did not augur well.
Hearing advocate K K Jha ‘Kamal’, who is challenging a Jharkhand HC order debarring him from practising before it for his repeated contemptuous remarks, a Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justice P Sathasivam said, ‘‘Every court has a right to debar any advocate from practising before it if he repeatedly indulges in contemptuous activity. If we do not have such power, then we can be abused by any lawyer.’’
When Jha argued that the Bar Council of India (BCI) was the sole regulator for lawyers and was the authority for cancelling the licence for practice, the Bench said, ‘‘The court cannot cancel your licence, but it can debar you from practising before it. You can go to other courts to practise.’’
When the lawyer persisted that the BCI was seized of the matter and the HC order restraining him from practising there was akin to punishment before determining the guilt, the Bench said, ‘‘If you misbehave, the HC has the right to debar you from practising. If anything happens in the court, the latter should not be powerless pending the inquiry by the BCI. The BCI gives you only a licence to practice provided you show proper behaviour and etiquette in the court.’’
In the court adjacent to the CJI’s, a Bench comprising Justices B N Agrawal and G S Singhvi heard the petitions filed by senior advocates Anand and Khan challenging the Delhi HC order debarring them from practising for four months in the HC and sending a recommendation to the full court for stripping them of the ‘senior advocate’ status. Senior advocate R S Sodhi, who before his retirement as a judge in the Delhi HC had heard Anand in several important cases, appeared for him and sought a stay on the ‘wrong’ order of the HC debarring his client from practising. He said there was a precedent in SC judgment that restrained any court from recommending stripping of a lawyer of his ‘senior advocate’ tag.
The Bench, which also heard Khan’s counsel, senior advocate P P Rao, was unimpressed and refused to grant interim relief when it was cited that in a ‘‘similar’’ contempt case against lawyer Rajeev Talwar, who was handed down an identical sentence by the HC, the sentence was stayed by the apex court.
With the Thanks from the Time of India
Source:- The Times of India 16 Sep. 2008 P.6
For any query:- legalpoint@aol.in
With the Thanks from the Time of India
Source:- The Times of India 16 Sep. 2008 P.6
For any query:- legalpoint@aol.in
No comments:
Post a Comment