The Supreme Court expunged adverse remarks made by a judge of the Uttarakhand High Court against a lawyer in an order passed in 2022. A Bench of Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan criticised the High Court for making such adverse comments without first hearing the affected lawyer’s defence. “The approach of the High Court in making the observations against the appellant (lawyer) without giving him any opportunity of being heard is totally unsustainable in law,” the Court said.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court expunged adverse remarks made by a judge of the Uttarakhand High Court against a lawyer, Dushyant Mainali, in a 2022 order passed.
The Bench, comprising Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan, criticized the Uttarakhand High Court for passing such comments without affording the lawyer an opportunity to present his defense.
Highlighting the violation of natural justice principles, the Bench stated,
“The approach of the High Court in making the observations against the appellant (lawyer) without giving him any opportunity of being heard is totally unsustainable in law.”
Reaffirming the judiciary’s commitment to upholding natural justice, the Supreme Court emphasized that courts at all levels must adhere to these principles, ensuring that no one is condemned unheard. The Bench observed,
“There is no necessity to reiterate that even the Courts, including a highest court of the Country, are bound by principle of natural justice. Nobody can be condemned unheard,”
-as noted in its order dated November 25.
Background of the Case
The matter arose from an appeal against a June 2022 interim order issued by the Uttarakhand High Court. This order was passed during the hearing of a plea to condone the delay in filing a revision petition challenging a 2019 trial court decision in a property dispute.
The litigant in the case alleged that his wife had approached lawyer Dushyant Mainali in 2019 to file the civil revision petition. However, he claimed that due to his old age and poor health, he was unable to visit the High Court to verify if the petition had been filed.
According to the litigant, he relied on the lawyer’s assurances that the necessary steps had been taken but discovered in 2022 that no such plea had been filed.
Taking a strict view of these allegations, Justice Sharad Kumar Sharma of the Uttarakhand High Court issued an order on June 20, 2022.
This order not only raised serious concerns but also referred the matter to the Bar Council of Uttarakhand for disciplinary proceedings against Mainali.
Relief for Advocate Mainali
Aggrieved by the High Court’s remarks and the referral to the Bar Council, Mainali approached the Supreme Court seeking relief.
On November 25, the apex court granted him relief by expunging the adverse observations made by Justice Sharma in the June 2022 order.
This included the withdrawal of the referral to the Bar Council of Uttarakhand.
Disapproval of Repeated Adverse Remarks
While delivering its judgment, the Supreme Court also took note of Justice Sharma’s tendency to make adverse remarks against lawyers in previous cases. The Bench remarked,
“This Court, in the case of same learned Judge of the High Court on various occasions, including in the reported judgment in the case of Neeraj Garg Vs. Sarita Rani and Ors. … and recently in …. Siddhartha Singh Vs. Assistant Collector First Class/Sub Divisional Magistrate & Ors., vide order dated 24.09.2024, have observed with disapproval the proclivity of the said learned Judge of the High Court in making remarks against the advocates.”
Senior Advocate Nidhesh Gupta and Advocates Vinod Kumar Shukla, Abhaya Nath Das, Sugam Mishra, Monica Goel, Kishor Kumar Mishra, Aditya Mishra, Barnali Basak, , Hukum Deo Prasad, and Satish Kumar appeared on behalf of the Mainali.
Advocate Bankey Bihari appeared for a respondent.
CASE TITLE:
Dushyant Mainali v. Diwan Singh Bora & Anr.
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on Judge Against Advocate
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
