Tips on Advocates Act

Tips on Advocates Act

698

• Non – appearance of the counsel in the case is professional misconduct. For withdrawal notice to the client be given. G. Sridher & Anr. v. State of A.P. 2005(2) RCR(Cri.) 116 A.P.
• False affidavit by deponent client regarding the age. The advocate has no responsibility. New Delhi Bar Ass. (Regd.) & Ors. v. National Capital Territory of Delhi Govt. of Delhi, 2004(2) RCR (Cri.) 40 Delhi.
• Advocates Act – State can appoint more than one addl. Advocate Generals of its choice. This appointment is not constitutional, rather it is executive. M.T. Khan v. Govt. of A.P., JT 2004(1) (SC) 146 : AIR 2004 SC 2934
• Allegations by the advocate against the Judges in Review petition after dismissal of SLP, matter referred to the Bar Counsel of India for necessary action. U.O.I. v. Gulshan Bajwa, JT 2003(8) (SC) 440.
• Duty of advocate – One should not refer a judgment already overruled and that there is no other judgment by larger bench. Raghu Bhai Surabhai Bhawad v. Satish Kumar Ranchhoddas Patel, 2003 Cri.L.J. 3984 Guj.
• Referring wrong arguments or Changing stand at different stages of proceedings is no offence covering the application of s. 195 Cr. P.C . N. Natrajan v. B. K. Subba Rao, 20003 (2) RCR (Cri. ) 424 (SC): AIR 2003 SC 541: 2003 Cri. L.J. 820.
• Review – Order already passed by the Bar Council can be reviewed even after 60 days. Licence cancelled is restored . JT 2003 (4) (SC) 435. B
• An advocate is an officer of the Court and legal profession is not a trade or business, rather it is an officer of the court and legal profession is not a trade or business rather it is a noble profession and advocates have to strive to secure justice for their clients within legally permissible limits. R.N. Sharma Advocate v. state of Haryana , 2003 (3) RCR (Cri) 166 (P&H).
• State Bar council has quasi judicial power and it also perform the role of the prosecutor and hence, is competent to file appeal being aggrieved person against the judgment of the Bar council of India. Bar Council of A. P. v Kurapati Satyanarayana, 2003 SCC (Cri.) 155: AIR 2003 SC 175.
• S. 303 Cr. P.C-Memo of appearance is sufficient in criminal case. Vakalatname is not necessary like the civil case. Ajay Mehta v. State of Karnataka, 2003 (1) RCR (Cri) 429(Karnataka).
• Advocate cannot argue his own case as an advocate but he can argue his case while appearing in person as general public. MCS- Barna v. C.B. Ramanurthy, 2002 (3) RCR (Cri.) 696 (Karnataka).
• Rs. 8118 received by the counsel on behalf of his client and kept with him. Then produced forged documents to establish that he has paid the amount. Licence cancelled permanently. Harish Chander Tiwari v. Baiju, 2002 SCC (Cri,) 294 (SC): AIR 2002 SC 548.
• Advocates Act – Undue adjournments of the case is an abuse of the process and also a misconduct. Mohd. Khalid v . State of Wst Bangal ,2002 (4) Crimes 160 (SC).

Professional Misconduct-Running of STD/Photocopier in the name of advocate. Licence cancelled for 5 year. Bhupinder Kumar Sharma v. Bar Ass. Pathankot, Jt 2001 (9) (SC) 480: AIR 2002 SC 41.