The Supreme Court has modified an order of the Bar Council of India (BCI) suspending an advocate from practice for one year, reducing the punishment to a warning while reiterating that indecent behaviour by lawyers within court premises constitutes professional misconduct and can be proceeded against under the Advocates Act, 1961, irrespective of whether the misconduct arises during court proceedings.
A Bench of Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar was hearing an appeal under Section 38 of the Advocates Act against the BCI’s July 21, 2012 order suspending the advocate for one year following a complaint alleging that he assaulted, abused and threatened the opposing party in the premises of the Labour Court after the latter’s application had been dismissed. The complainant had also lodged police complaints regarding the alleged incident.
The appellant contended that he had been denied a fair opportunity of hearing before the BCI after his request for adjournment was rejected and the matter was taken up for final hearing on the same day. The Court noted that the complaint had originally been dismissed in 2009 on the ground that the advocate was not engaged by the complainant, but was later restored in review and eventually culminated in the order of suspension.
Also Read SC Orders Four-Tier Motor Insurance Regime, ANPR-Based E-Challans for Uninsured Vehicles
While observing that the appellant had not been afforded an adequate opportunity of hearing before the BCI, the Supreme Court declined to remand the matter, noting that nearly 21 years had elapsed since the complaint was first lodged before the Bar Council of Delhi.
Importantly, the Court clarified that although the alleged assault and criminal intimidation had already been reported to the police and the criminal aspect was outside the jurisdiction of the Bar Councils, the conduct of an advocate within court premises remains subject to disciplinary scrutiny under the Advocates Act. It held that every lawyer owes a duty to behave with dignity not only towards the court but also towards opposing counsel, litigants and clients, and that any indecent behaviour inside court premises can attract disciplinary proceedings before the State Bar Council or the Bar Council of India.
Taking into account the nature of the allegations, the prolonged passage of time and the fact that the allegations related to the advocate’s conduct in the court premises rather than the conduct of litigation, the Court substituted the one-year suspension with a warning, directing the advocate to always conduct himself properly while dealing with opposing lawyers, clients and litigants within court premises. The appeal was accordingly disposed of.
