Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 912 (PNJ)

Gulshan Kumar v. Paramjit Kaur

2013-07-23

PARAMJEET SINGH

body2013
JUDGMENT Mr. Paramjeet Singh, J.: (Oral) - The instant petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed against the order dated 29.5.2013 (Annexure P-7) passed by learned Additional District Judge, Nawanshahar whereby the objections of respondent have been allowed and examination as witness of Sh. Harshwardhan Gautam, Advocate, who happened to be the counsel of petitioner Gulshan Kumar in the trial Court has been declined. 2. The application of the petitioner for permission to examine Sh. Harshwardhan, Advocate has been dismissed by the learned Lower Appellate Court by taking into consideration the provisions of Section 126 of Indian Evidence Act treating it as a bar on professional communication and that a counsel cannot be compelled to disclose anything which has happened between a client and a counsel. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. 4. This Court is of the considered opinion that provisions of Section 126 of Indian Evidence Act are not applicable, when his own client is calling the advocate as a witness for the purpose to prove certain things which have taken place between them. 5. Section 126 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 reads as under:- 126. Professional communications.- No barrister, attorney, pleader or vakil shall at any time be permitted, unless with his client’ s express consent, to disclose any communication made to him in the course and for the purpose of his employment as such barrister, pleader, attorney or vakil, by or on behalf of his client, or to state the contents or condition of any document with which he has become acquainted in the course and for the purpose of his professional employment, or to disclose any advice. 6. In view of the above, the order dated 29.5.2013 (Annexure P-7) passed by learned Additional District Judge, Nawanshahar is not sustainable in the eyes of law and the same is, hereby, set aside. The evidence of Sh.Harshwardhan Gautam, Advocate should be taken into consideration. An opportunity will be given to the opposite party to crossexamine him. Dispose of in above terms.