Research › Search › Judgment

Patna High Court · body

2009 DIGILAW 1175 (PAT)

Praveen Kumar v. Bar Council Of India

2009-09-01

JYOTI SARAN, SHIVA KIRTI SINGH

body2009
JUDGEMENT 1. We have heard Mr. Praveen Kumar, the appellant and learned Addl. Advocate General-Ill at the stage of admission of this appeal. 2. From the materials on record, it appears that elections to the Bihar State Bar Council could not take place in time and, therefore, a Special Committee had to be constituted under Section 8A of the Advocates Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). It further appears that feeling aggrieved by some delay in holding of the elections and for some other matters, the appellant, who is a practicing advocate of this Court, made certain complaints which are available in the records of the writ petition at pages 37 to 39. One of those three complaints dated 30.11.2008 appears to be signed by one S.S.P. Singh, convener of the Adhivakta Sewak Sangha, Bihar, Patna and not by the appellant. 3. Taking note of those three complaints and the tone and tenure therein, the Special Committee resolved on 14.1.2009 under item no. 16 to initate a disciplinary proceeding against the appellant which was referred to the disciplinary committee for taking suitable action. Pursuant to notice the appellant appeared on 6.3.2009 and again on 20.3.2009. He could not appear on 8.5.2009. Thereafter, by Annexure-16 to the writ petition dated 23.6.2009 the appellant was communicated with a decision of the Special Committee dated 22.5.2009 alongwith a decision of the disciplinary committee to the effect that the disciplinary proceeding against him has been reported/referred to the Bar Council of India under Section 36(2) of the Act. 4. The appellant has canvassed many points including a point that the Special Committee cannot be a substitute of State Bar Council in disciplinary matter and also he has alleged that the action was initiated against him by some advocates, who were members of the disciplinary committee because he had levelled allegations against them also. 5. Learned AAG-III has submitted that orders passed by the Bar Council of India are appealable under Section 38 of the Act and once the matter has been referred to the Bar Council of India and notice has been issued by the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India, this Court should not interfere in the matter and the order of the Bar Council of India can be challenged before the Apex Court in appeal. 6. 6. The enclosures to Annexure-16 dated 23.6.2009 show that out of three members of the disciplinary committee two persons fairly noted that when the allegations have been levelled against those two, it would not proper and fair to hear and decide the case by that committee. However, it was further noted in the decision dated 8.5.2009 that "seeing the gravity and seriousness.......... it is necessary that this case may be reported/referred to the Bar Council of India under Section 36(2) of the Act for conducting enquiry of the present poceeding for taking disciplinary action against learned advocate- Praveen Kumar......". That decision of the disciplinary committee was considered by the Special Committee on 22.5.2009 in which three persons were present which included those two very members of the disciplinary committee besides the Advocate General, who was the Chairman of the Special Committee. The Special Committee acting as per recommendation of the disciplinary committee, reported/referred the matter to the Bar Council of India. 7. Prima facie, we find some merits in the submission advanced by the appellant that once two members of the disciplinary committee decided that it is not fair for them to participate in the proceeding against the appellant, they should not have made further observations and decided to refer the matter to the Bar Council of India treating it as a grave and serious matter. 8. In view of aforesaid facts, we admit this appeal for hearing. 9. The Bar Council of India, respondent no. 1, is represented by Mr R.K. Sinha, Advocate. Respondents No. 2 and 3 are represented by learned AAG-III. 10. Let notice be issued to respondents no. 4 and 5 in the hearing matter for which requisites by ordinary process as well as by registered cover with A/d must be filed within one week failing which the appeal as against respondents no. 4 and 5 shall stand dismissed without further reference to a Bench. 11. During pendency of this appeal, further proceedings in the disciplinary matter against the appellant before the Bar Council of India shall remain stayed. 12. Let the matter be listed for hearing before appropriate Bench in the 1st week of February, 2010 amongst first ten cases.