Unruly behavior by Lawyer before Judge - ‘Advocates Act' Needs to be Reviewed - SC
A Civil Judge in Etah, UP wrote to his District Judge that while he was hearing a case, a lawyer appeared in the Court and, while using intemperate language, spoke in a loud voice:
"How did you pass an order against my client in the case titled as “Kanchan Singh vs. Ratan Singh”? How did you dare pass such an order against my client? I tried to console him, but he started shouting in a state of highly agitated mind: “Kanchan Singh is my relative and how was this order passed against my relative? No Judicial Officer has, ever, dared pass an order against me. Then, how did you dare do so? When any Judicial officer passes an order on my file against my client, I set him right. I shall make a complaint against you to Hon'ble High Court”, and he threatened me: "I will not let you remain in Etah in future, I can do anything against you. I have relations with highly notorious persons and I can get you harmed by such notorious persons to the extent I want to do, and I myself am capable of doing any deed (misdeed) as I wish, and I am not afraid of any one. In the Court compound, even my shoes are worshipped and I was prosecuted in two murder cases. And I have made murderous assaults on people and about 15 to 20 cases are going on against me. If you, in future, dare pass an order on the file against my client in which I am a counsel, it will not be good for you".
The High Court sentenced the advocate to two months imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs. 2000.
The High Court observed,
The subordinate courts in Uttar Pradesh are witnessing disturbing period. In most of the subordinate courts, the Advocates or their groups and Bar Associations have been virtually taken over the administration of justice to ransom. These Advocates even threaten and intimidate the Judges to obtain favourable orders. The Judicial Officers often belonging to different districts are not able to resist the pressure and fall prey to these Advocates. This disturbs the equilibrium between Bar and the Bench giving undue advantage and premium to the Bar. In these extraordinary situations the High Court cannot abdicate its constitutional duties to protect the judicial officers .
The High Court also directed the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh to draw proceedings against him for professional misconduct.
On appeal, the Supreme Court on Tuesday held that no error has been committed by the High Court while coming to the conclusion that the appellant had committed contempt of Court. However, the Supreme Court set aside the sentence for imprisonment in view of advanced age of the appellant.
An Epilogue: The Supreme Court made some noteworthy comments before parting with the case:
Legal profession being the most important component of justice delivery system, it must continue to perform its significant role and regulatory mechanism and should not be seen to be wanting in taking prompt action against any malpractice. We have noticed the inaction of the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh as well as the Bar Council of India in spite of direction in the impugned order of the High Court and in spite of notice to the Bar Council of India by this Court. We have also noticed the failure of all concerned to advert to the observations made by the Gujarat High Court 33 years ago. Thus there appears to be urgent need to review the provisions of the Advocates Act dealing with regulatory mechanism for the legal profession and other incidental issues, in consultation with all concerned.
We request the Law Commission of India to go into all relevant aspects relating to regulation of legal profession in consultation with all concerned at an early date. We hope the Government of India will consider taking further appropriate steps in the light of report of the Law Commission within six months thereafter. The Central Government may file an appropriate affidavit in this regard within one month after expiry of one year .