The Supreme Court on Thursday (January 25) stayed the order passed by the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India imposing a cost amounting to Rs. 50,000/- on the advocate for filing a vague complaint against another advocate before the Bar Council, calling It a ‘Drastic’ measure.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India has intervened in a disciplinary matter involving the Bar Council of India (BCI). On January 25, the apex court issued a stay on an order by the BCI’s Disciplinary Committee, which had imposed a hefty fine of Rs. 50,000 on an advocate. This decision by the Supreme Court has been seen as a critical move in the legal fraternity, highlighting the court’s stance on disciplinary actions taken by the Bar Council.
The case in question involved a complaint filed by an advocate against her brother, who is also an advocate. The complainant accused her brother of continuous harassment through derogatory and objectionable emails. This complaint was brought under the provisions of the Advocates Act, 1961, and the rules of the Bar Council of India, categorizing the behavior as professional misconduct.
However, the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India, in its order dated November 2, 2023, dismissed the complaint as vague and not maintainable under the Advocates Act. Furthermore, the Committee imposed a stringent penalty on the complainant, directing her to pay Rs. 50,000 to the welfare fund of the Maharashtra and Goa Bar Council. Failure to comply with this order would result in the suspension of her license for six months.
The Supreme Court bench, comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, reviewed this matter. While the court did not interfere with the Disciplinary Committee’s decision to dismiss the complaint, it took a critical view of the penalty imposed.
The court noted,
“However, the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council has imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000 on the appellant while dismissing the complaint and passed a very drastic order that if the cost amount is not paid, the license of the appellant will be suspended. We stay that part of the impugned order by which cost has been imposed and consequences of non-deposit of cost has been provided.”
This intervention by the Supreme Court underscores the judiciary’s oversight role in matters of legal discipline and the protection of advocates rights. The court’s decision to stay the imposition of the cost on the complainant reflects a balancing act between maintaining professional standards and ensuring that disciplinary measures are not excessively punitive.
Additionally, the court directed the appellant to implead the Bar Council of India as party respondent no.2 and issued a notice returnable on March 15, 2024. Advocate-on-record Mr. Lalltaksh Joshi represented the appellant-complainant in this case.
The Supreme Court’s decision in this matter is a reminder of the complex nature of legal ethics and professional conduct within the legal community. It highlights the need for disciplinary bodies like the Bar Council to exercise their powers judiciously, ensuring that penalties are proportionate to the misconduct and do not unduly harm the professional standing of advocates. This case will be closely watched by the legal community for its implications on the standards of professional conduct and the role of the judiciary in overseeing disciplinary actions within the legal profession.
FOLLOW US ON X(TWITTER) FOR MORE AND BRISK LEGAL UPDATES.
