k- 710 professional ethics by mr. lokendra singh

Upload: manukumarmittal

Post on 21-Feb-2018

220 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    1/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    "

    !"#$! "&'()*

    $))+,-&$.(!(&/ 0+1

    !$2/"1* $-3

    ."-)'4.$1

    1"!$&(+-*

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    2/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    #

    !5678 "9:; *;6?;@;

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    3/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    C

    15,8+5,8&* >= +%& 5*%&)&8-& 58* (>.&)/58-& (0 5 .&+ (0 A)(0&..,(85? 8()1. >=

    +%(.&

    '%( 5*(A+ +%,. A)(0&..,(8; @+ ,. 38('. 5. ?&&+'&&8 D&8-%

    58* D5)

    ,8 +%& A)(1(+,(8 (0 %,?,.% %(8()5>?& 58*

    05,)*&5?,8?,.% 5

    .A,),+ (0 >)(+%&)%((* ',+% >5);

    "&'()* +0 !"#$! A1+0"**(+-

    B57?;?6C -79DE5 7?F -55F

    F)(0&..,(85? &+%,-. 5)& 5 .&+ (0 8()1. () -(*&. (0 -(8*:-+7 .&+ >= A&(A?& ,8 5

    .A&-,0,-

    A)(0&..,(8; G -(*& (0 &+%,-. ,. *&/&?(A&* 0() &5-% A)(0&..,(8; H:AA(.& =(:

    '),+&

    5)+,-?&. ,8 5 8&'.A5A&); F)(0&..,(85? &+%,-. )&I:,)& +%5+ =(: /&),0= 05-+. >&0()&

    =(:

    F&(A?& 5)& .:)A),.&* '%&8 +%&= %&5) +%5+ ?5'=&). 5)& &JA&-+&* +( 0(??('

    A)(0&..,(85?

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    4/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    K

    &+%,-. 58* +%5+ +%&= 5)& 5--(:8+5>?& 0() *,.%(8&.+7 ,))&.A(8.,>?& 58*

    :8A)(0&..,(85?

    >&%5/,(); L:)+%&)7 1(.+ A&(A?& *( 8(+ 38(' +%5+ ?5'=&). ,8 @8*,5 -58 ?(.& +%&

    ?,-&8.&

    +( A)5-+,-& ,0 +%&= 5)& 0(:8*

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    5/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    O

    A1+0"**(+-$! "&'()*

    *5= +%& M%,&0 P:.+,-& (0 @8*,5; @+ %5. >&&8 15*& -?&5)

    +%5+ 58=

    ):?&. 15*& ,8 )&?5+,(8 +( +%& .+58*5)*. (0 A)(0&..,(85? -(8*:-+ 58* &+,I:&++&

    +( >&

    (>.&)/&* >= +%& 5*/(-5+&. 58* ,8 0()-& >&0()& +%& -(11&8-&1&8+ (0 +%&

    G*/(-5+&.

    4G1&8*1&8+6 G-+7 "QRC7 .%5?? -(8+,8:& ,8 0()-&7 :8+,? 5?+&)&* () )&A&5?&* ()

    51&8*&*

    ,8 5--()*58-& ',+% +%& A)(/,.,(8. (0 +%,. 5-+;

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    6/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    S

    M%5A+&) @@ (0 A5)+ T@ (0 +%& ):?&. 0)51&* >= +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 *&5?. ',+%

    +%&

    .+58*5)*. (0 A)(0&..,(85? -(8*:-+ 58* &+,I:&++&; @+ -(8+5,8. .&/&)5? ):?&.

    '%,-% ?5=

    *('8 +%& .+58*5)*. (0 A)(0&..,(85? -(8*:-+ 58* &+,I:&++&; $%&.& ):?&. .A&-,0=+%&

    *:+,&. (0 58 5*/(-5+& +( +%& M(:)+7 -?,&8+7 (AA(8&8+ 58* -(??&5& *,.-:..&* 5. 0(??('U

    3D9O 9HP7EF=

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    7/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    R

    $%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 %5. 15*& -&)+5,8 ):?&. .( 5. +( A)&.-),>& *:+,&. (0 58

    5*/(-5+& +( +%& -(:)+; H:-% *:+,&. 15= >& &JA?5,8&* 5. 0(??('

    "6 V:),8< +%& A)&.&8+5+,(8 +%& -5.& 58* '%,?& 5-+,8< (+%&)',.& 5. 58 5*/(-5+&

    >&0()& +%& -(:)+ ,+ ,. )&I:,)&* +( -(8*:-+ %,1.&?0 ',+% *,1,+ %,. &5),8< ,8 1,8* +%5+ +%& *,= 58= ,??&,+. +%& A),/5+& -(11:8,-5+,(8 ',+% +%&

    E:*= ,??&&.+ &00()+ +( )&.+)5,8 58* A)&/&8+

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    8/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    X

    %,. -?,&8+ 0)(1 )&.()+,8< +( .%5)A () :805,) A)5-+,-& (AA(.,+& 0)(1 -(:8-,?

    () A5)+,&. '%,-% +%& 5*/(-5+& %,1.&?0 (:& *)&..

    58* %,. 5AA&5)58-& .%5?? 5?'5=. >& A)&.&8+5>?&;

    S6 G8 5*/(-5+& .%5?? 8(+ &8+&) 5AA&5)58-& 5-+7 A?&5*7 () A)5-+,-& ,8 58= '5=

    >&0()& 5 -(:)+7 +),>:85?7 () 5:+%(),+= 1&8+,(8&* ,8 .&-+,(8 CY (0 +%&

    G*/(-5+&. G-+7 "QS" ,0 +%& .(?& () 58= 1&1>&) +%&)&(0 ,. )&?5+&* +( +%&

    5*/(-5+& 5. 05+%&)7 8&A%&'7 58*7 1(+%&)7 ',0&7 *5:58*. ()

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    9/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    Q

    Q6 G8 5*/(-5+& .%5?? 8(+ 5-+ () A?&5* ,8 58= 15++&) ,8 '%,-% %& %,1.&?0 %5.

    .(1& A&-:8,5)= ,8+&)&.+;

    3D9O 9HP7EF= )8;5?9

    W:?& "" +( CC *&5? ',+% +%& *:+,&. (0 58 5*/(-5+& +( %,. -?,&8+; $%&.& ):?&. 15=

    >&

    &JA?5,8&* 5. 0(??('

    "Y6 W:?& "" A)(/,*&. +%5+ 58 5*/(-5+& ,. >(:8* +( 5--&A+ 58= >),&0 ,8 +%& -(:)+

    () +),>:85? () >&0()& 58= 5:+%(),+= '%,-% %& A)(A(.&. +( A)5-+,-& 5+ 0&&

    -(8.,.+&8+ ',+% %,. .+58*,8< 5+ >5) 58* 5?.( 85+:)& (0 -5.&;

    ""6 W:?& "# A)(/,*&. +%5+ 58 5*/(-5+& .%5?? 8(+ ',+%*)5' 0)(1 &8&?,&/& +%5+ %& ',?? >& 5 ',+8&..;

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    10/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    "Y

    "C6 W:?& "K A)(/,*&. +%5+ 58 5*/(-5+& .%5?? 5+ +%& -(11&8-&1&8+ (0 %,.

    &8?,= .&-+,(8 "#S (0 @8*,58 \/,*&8-& G-+;

    "R6 W:?& "X A)(/,*&. +%5+ 58 5*/(-5+& .%5?? 8(+ 5+ 58= +,1& >& 5 A5)+= +( +%&

    0(1&8+,8< ?,+,

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    11/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    ""

    "X6 W:?& "Q 153&. ,+ -?&5) +%5+ 58 5*/(-5+& .%5?? 8(+ 5-+ (8 +%& ,8.+):-+,(8 (0

    58= A&).(8 (+%&) +%58 %,. -?,&8+ () %,. 5:+%(),Z&* 5:= () +)500,- ,8 () .+,A:?5+& 0()

    () 5?& -?5,1;

    #"6 W:?& ## A)(/,*&. +%5+ 58 5*/(-5+& .%5?? 8(+ *,)&-+?= () ,8*,)&-+?= >,* 0(& ()

    A:)-%5.& &,+%&) ,8 %,. ('8 851& () 58= (+%&) 851& 0() %,. ('8 >&8&0,+ ()

    >&8&0,+ (0 58= (+%&) A&).(87 58= A)(A&)+= .(?* ,8 &J&-:+,(8 (0 *&-)&& ()

    (+%&) A)(-&&*,8< ,8 '%,-% %& '5. A)(0&..,(85??= &8=

    %,. -?,&8+ 5,?,+= *(&. 8(+ 5),.& ,8 -(:).& (0 %,. &1A?(=1&8+ 5. 58 5*/(-5+&;

    #C6 W:?& #K A)(/,*&. +%5+ 58 5*/(-5+& .%5?? 8(+ *( 58=+%,8< '%&)&>= %&

    5>:.&. () +53& 5*/58+5= %,. -?,&8+;

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    12/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    "#

    #K6 W:?& #O A)(/,*&. +%5+ 58 5*/(-5+& .%(:?* 3&&A 58 5--(:8+ (0 -?,&8+.

    1(8&= &8+):.+&* +( %,1 58* 5--(:8+. .%(:?* .%(' 51(:8+ )&-&,/&* 0)(1

    +%& -?,&8+ () (8 %,. >&%5?0 +%& &JA&8.&. ,8-:))&* 0() %,1 58* +%& *&>,+.

    15*& (8 5--(:8+ (0 0&&. ',+% +%& )&.A&-+,/& *5+&. 58* 5?? (+%&) 8&-&..5)=

    A5)+,-:?5).;

    #O6 W:?& #S A)(/,*&. +%5+ '%&)& 1(8&= 5)& )&-&,/&* 0)(1 () (8 5--(:8+ (0

    -?,&8+7 +%& &8+),&. ,8 +%& 5--(:8+ .%(:?* -(8+5,8 5 )&0&)&8-& 5. +( '%&+%&)

    +%& 51(:8+ %5/& >&&8 )&-&,/&* 0() 0&&. () &JA&8.&. 58* *:),8< +%& -(:).&

    (0 +%& A)(-&&*,8< 8( 5*/(-5+& .%5?? 5--&A+ ',+% +%& -(8.&8+ ,8 '),+,8< (0

    +%& -?,&8+ -(8-&)8&* >& 5+ ?,>&)+= +( *,/&)+ 58= A()+,(8 (0 +%& &JA&8.&.

    +('5)*. 0&&;

    #S6 W:?& #R A)(/,*&. +%5+ '%&)& 58= 51(:8+ ,. )&-&,/&* () &%5?0 (0 %,. -?,&8+7 +%& 05-+ (0 .:-% )&-&,A+ 1:.+ >& ,8+,15+&* +( +%& -?,&8+

    5. &5)?= 5. A(..,>?&; @0 +%& -?,&8+ *&158*. +%& A5=1&8+ (0 .:-% 1(8&= 58*

    ,8 .A,+& (0 .:-% *&158* +%& 5*/(-5+& *(&. 8(+ A5= %,17 %& ',?? >&

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    13/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    "C

    #R6 W:?& #X A)(/,*&. +%5+ 50+&) +&)1,85+,(8 (0 +%& A)(-&&*,8< +%& 5*/(-5+&

    .%5?? >& 5+ ?,>&)+= +( 5AA)(A),5+& +('5)*. +%& .&++?& 0&& *:& +( %,1 58= .:1

    )&15,8,8< :8&JA58*&* (:+ (0 +%& 51(:8+ A5,* () .&8* +( %,1 0() &JA&8.&.

    () 58= 51(:8+ +%5+ %5. -(1& ,8+( %,. %58*. ,8 +%5+ A)(-&&*,8&&8 ?&0+ :8.&++?&* +%& 5*/(-5+& -58

    *&*:-+ (:+ (0 58= 1(8&= (0 +%& -?,&8+ )&15,8,8< ,8 %,. %58* 5+ +%& +&)1,85+,(8

    (0 +%& A)(-&&*,8< 0() '%,-% %& %5* >&&8 &8,+. 58 5*/(-5+& +( ?&8* 1(8&= +( %,. -?,&8+ 0() +%& A:)A(.&

    (0 58= 5-+,(8 0() ?&

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    14/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    "K

    A)(/,*&. +%5+ 58 5*/(-5+& .%5?? 8(+ ?&8* 1(8&= +( %,. -?,&8+ 0(& +%&

    A:)A(.& (0 58= 5-+,(8 () ?&= +%& D5) -(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 -(8+5,8 A)(/,.,(8. 5. +( +%&

    *:+,&.

    (0 58 5*/(-5+& +( +%& (AA(8&8+;

    W:?& CK A)(/,*&. +%5+ 58 5*/(-5+& .%5?? 8(+ ,8 58= '5= -(11:8,-5+& ()

    8&E&-+ 15++&) (0 -(8+)(/&).= ',+% 58= A5)+= )&A)&.&8+&* >= 58

    5*/(-5+&

    &J-&A+ +%)(:&.+ +( -5))= (:+ 5?? ?&

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    15/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    "O

    15*& +( +%& (AA(.,+& A5)+= &/&8 +%(:= +%& .+5+& >5) -(:8-,? .%5?? >& -)&*,+&* ,8 5 .&A5)5+& 0:8* +( >&

    38('8 5. ^D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 G*/(-5+&. '&?05)& 0:8* 0() +%& H+5+&_ 58*

    .%5?? >& *&A(.,+&* ,8 +%& >583 5. A)(/,*&* +%&)& :8*&); G--()*,8< +( ):?& K"4#6

    +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 G*/(-5+&. `&?05)& 0:8* M(11,++&& 0() +%& H+5+&

    .%5?? )&1,+ #Ya (0 +%& +(+5? 51(:8+ -(??&-+&* 58* -)&*,+&* +( ,+. 5--(:8+7 +(

    +%&

    >5) -(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 >= +%& &8* (0 &/&)= 1(8+% '%,-% .%5?? >& -)&*,+&* >= +%&

    D5) -(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 58* +%& D5) -(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 .%5?? *&A(.,+ +%& .5,* 51(:8+

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    16/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    "S

    ,8 5 .&A5)5+& 0:8* +( >& 38('8 5. ^D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 G*/(-5+&. `&?05)&

    0:8*;_

    G--()*,8< +( ):?& K"4C6 +%& )&.+ XYa (0 +%& +(+5? .:1 .( -(??&-+&* >= +%& D5)

    M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 G*/(-5+& `&?05)& L:8* M(11,++&& 0() +%& .+5+& .%5?? >&

    :+,?,Z&* 0() +%& '&?05)& (0 +%& 5*/(-5+&. ,8 )&.A&-+ (0 '&?05)& .-%&1&.

    .A(8.()&* >= +%& )&.A&-+,/& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,?;

    W:?& K# *&5?. ',+% +%& -(8.&I:&8-&. (0 8(8 A5=1&8+ (0 +%& .5,* 51(:8+ >=

    +%&

    5*/(-5+&; @+ A)(/,*&. +%5+ ,0 58 5*/(-5+& 05,?. +( A5= +%& 50()&.5,* .:1 ',+%,8

    +%& A)&.-),>&* +,1&7 +%& .&-)&+5)= (0 +%& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? .%5?? ,..:& +( %,1 5

    8(+,-& +( .%(' -5:.& ',+%,8 5 1(8+% '%= %,. ),& 8(+

    .:.A&8*&*; @8 -5.& +%& 5*/(-5+& A5=. +%& 51(:8+ +(& *)(AA&*; @0 +%& 5*/(-5+&

    *(&. 8(+ A5= +%& 51(:8+ () 05,?. +( .%(' .:00,-,&8+ -5:.&7 5 -(11,++&& (0

    +%)&&

    1&1>&). -(8.+,+:+&* >= +%& .+5+& >5) -(:8-,? ,8 +%,. >&%5?0 15= A5.. 58 ()*&)

    .:.A&8*,8< +%& ),

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    17/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    "R

    >:.,8&.. () 58= 5/(-5+,(8 ,8-(8.,.+&8+ ',+% %,. A)5-+,-,8< 5. 58 5*/(-5+& ()

    %5. ,8-:))&* 58= *,.I:5?,0,-5+,(8 1&8+,(8&* ,8 +%& G*/(-5+&. G-+ () +%& ):?&.

    15*& +%&)& :8*&)7 .%5?? .&8* 5 *&-?5)5+,(8 +( +%& &00&-+ +( +%& )&.A&-+,/& .+5+&

    >5) -(:8-,? ,8 '%,-% +%& 5*/(-5+& ,. &8)(??&*7 ',+%,8 QY *5=. 0)(1 +%& *5+& (0

    .:-% *,.I:5?,0,-5+,(8;

    W:?& KK A)(/,*&.7 58 5AA&5? .%5?? ?,& +( +%& >5) -(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 5+ +%& ,8.+58-&

    (0 58 5 153&. ,+

    -?&5) +%5+ +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 .%5?? :+,?,.& +%& 0:8*. )&-&,/&* :8*&) ):?&

    K"4#67 .+5+&* 5>(/&7 ,8 5--()*58-& ',+% +%& .-%&1& '%,-% 15= >& 0)51&* 0)(1

    +,1& +( +,1&;

    #6 V:+= ,8 ,1A5)+,8< +)5,8,8< b ):?& KO 0)51&* >= +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5

    153&. ,+ -?&5) +%5+ ,+ ,. ,1A)(A&) 0() 58 5*/(-5+& +( *&158* () 5--&A+ 0&&. ()

    58= A)&1,:1 0)(1 58= A&).(8 5. 5 -(8.,*&)5+,(8 0() ,1A5)+,8< +)5,8,8< ,8 ?5'

    :8*&) +%& ):?&. A)&.-),>&* >= +%& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? +( &85>?& .:-% A&).(8 +(

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    18/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    "X

    I:5?,0= 0() &8)(?1&8+ :8*&) +%& G*/(-5+&. G-+7 "QS"

    C6 V:+= +( )&8*&) ?&

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    19/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    "Q

    A)5-+,-& 58* .%5?? +53,8< :A 58= .:-% &1A?(=1&8+ ,8+,15+& +%& 05-+ +( +%& >5)

    -(:8-,? (8 '%(.& )(?? %,. 851& 5AA&5). 58* .%5?? +%&)&:A(8 -&5.& +( A)5-+,-&

    5. 58 5*/(-5+& .( ?(8< 5. %& -(8+,8:&. ,8 .:-% &1A?(=1&8+; W:?& OY A)(/,*&.

    +%5+ 58 5*/(-5+& '%( %5. ,8%&),+&* () .:--&&*&* >= .:)/,/().%,A7 +( 5 051,?=

    >:.,8&.. 15= -(8+,8:& ,+7 >:+ 15= 8(+ A&).(85??= A5)+,-,A5+& ,8 +%&

    1585

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    20/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    #Y

    The Mayors Courts, established in the three presidency towns,

    were Crown Courts with right of appeal first to the Governor-in-

    Council and a right of second appeal to the Privy Council. In 1791,

    Judges felt the need of experience, and thus the role of an attorney

    to protect the rights of his client was upheld in each of the Mayors

    Courts. This was done in spite of opposition from Council members

    or the Governor. A second principle was also established during the

    period of the Mayors Courts. This was the right to dismiss an

    attorney guilty of misconduct. The first example of dismissal was

    recorded by the Mayors Court at Madras which dismissed attorney

    Jones.

    The Supreme Court of Judicature was established by a Royal

    Charter in 1774. The Supreme Court was established as there was

    dissatisfaction with the weaknesses of the Court of the

    Mayor. Similar Supreme Courts were established in Madras in 1801

    and Bombay in 1823. The first barristers appeared in India after the

    opening of the Supreme Court in Calcutta in 1774. As barristers

    began to come into the Courts on work as advocates, the attorneys

    gave up pleading and worked as solicitors. The two grades of legal

    practice gradually became distinct and separate as they were in

    England. Madras gained its first barrister in 1778 with Mr. Benjamin

    Sullivan.

    Thus, the establishment of the Supreme Court brought recognition,

    wealth and prestige to the legal profession. The charters of the

    Court stipulated that the Chief Justice and three puisne Judges be

    English barristers of at least 5 years standing.

    The charters empowered the Court to approve, admit and enrol

    advocates and attorneys to plead and act on behalf of suitors. They

    also gave the Court the authority to remove lawyers from the roll of

    the Court on reasonable cause and to prohibit practitioners not

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    21/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    #"

    properly admitted and enrolled from practising in the Court. The

    Court maintained the right to admit, discipline and dismiss

    attorneys and barristers. Attorneys were not admitted without

    recommendation from a high official in England or a Judge in

    India. Permission to practice in Court could be refused even to a

    barrister.

    In contrast to the Courts in the presidency towns, the legal

    profession in the mofussil towns was established, guided and

    controlled by legislation. In the Diwani Courts, legal practice was

    neither recognized nor controlled, and practice was carried on by

    vakils and agents. Vakils had even been appearing in the Courts of

    the Nawabs and there were no laws concerning their qualification,

    relationship to the Court, mode of procedure of ethics or

    practice. There were two kinds of agents a. untrained relatives or

    servants of the parties in Court and b. professional pleaders who

    had training in either Hindu or Muslim law. Bengal Regulation VII of

    1793 was enacted as it was felt that in order to administer justice,

    Courts, must have pleading of causes administered by a distinct

    profession Only men of character and education, well versed in the

    Mohamedan or Hindu law and in the Regulations passed by the

    British Government, would be admitted to plead in the Courts. They

    should be subjected to rules and restrictions in order to discharge

    their work diligently and faithfully by upholding the clients trust.Establishment of the High Courts

    In 1862, the High Courts started by the Crown were established at

    Calcutta, Bombay and Madras. The High Court Bench was designed

    to combine Supreme Court and Sudder Court traditions. This was

    done to unite the legal learning and judicial experience of the

    English barristers with the intimate experience of civil servants in

    matters of Indian customs, usages and laws possessed by the civil

    servants. Each of the High Courts was given the power to make

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    22/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    ##

    rules for the qualifications of proper persons, advocates, vakils and

    attorneys at Bar. The admission of vakils to practice before the

    High Courts ended the monopoly that the barristers had enjoyed in

    the Supreme Courts. It greatly extended the practice and prestige of

    the Indian laws by giving them opportunities and privileges equal to

    those enjoyed for many years by the English lawyers. The learning

    of the best British traditions of Indian vakils began in a guru-shishya

    tradition:

    Men like Sir V. Bashyam Ayyangar, Sir T. Muthuswamy Ayyar and

    Sir S. Subramania Ayyar were quick to learn and absorb the

    traditions of the English Bar from their English friends and

    colleagues in the Madras Bar and they in turn as the originators of a

    long line of disciples in the Bar passed on those traditions to the

    disciples who continued to do the good work.

    Additional High Courts were established in Allahabad (1886), Patna

    (1916), and Lahore (1919).

    There were six grades of legal practice in India after the founding of

    the High Courts a) Advocates, b) Attorneys (Solicitors), c) Vakils of

    High Courts, d) Pleaders, e) Mukhtars, f) Revenue Agents. The Legal

    Practitioners Act of 1879 in fact brought all the six grades of the

    profession into one system under the jurisdiction of the High

    Courts. The Legal Practitioners Act and the Letters Patent of the

    High Courts formed the chief legislative governance of legalpractitioners in the subordinate Courts in the country until the

    Advocates Act, 1961 was enacted.

    In order to be a vakil, the candidate had to study at a college or

    university, master the use of English and pass a vakils

    examination. By 1940, a vakil was required to be a graduate with

    an LL.B. from a university in India in addition to three other certified

    requirements. The certificate should be proof that a. he had passed

    in the examination b. read in the chamber of a qualified lawyer and

    was of a good character. In fact, Sir Sunder Lal, Jogendra Nath

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    23/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    #C

    Chaudhary, Ram Prasad and Moti Lal Nehru were all vakils who

    were raised to the rank of an Advocate.

    Original and appellate jurisdiction of the High Court.

    The High Courts of the three presidency towns had an original

    side. The original side included major civil and criminal matters

    which had been earlier heard by predecessor Supreme Courts. On

    the original side in the High Courts, the solicitor and barrister

    remained distinct i.e. attorney and advocate. On the appellate side

    every lawyer practiced as his own attorney.

    However, in Madras the vakils started practice since 1866. In 1874,

    the barristers challenged their right to do original side work.

    However, in 1916, this right was firmly established in favour of the

    vakils. Similarly, vakils in Bombay and Calcutta could be promoted

    as advocates and become qualified to work on the original side. By

    attending the appellate side and original side Courts each for one

    year, a vakil of 10 years service in the Court was permitted to sit for

    the advocatesexamination.

    Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926.

    The Indian Bar Councils Act, 1926 was passed to unify the various

    grades of legal practice and to provide self-government to the Bars

    attached to various Courts. The Act required that each High Courtmust constitute a Bar Council made up of the Advocate General,

    four men nominated by the High Court of whom two should be

    Judges and ten elected from among the advocates of the Bar. The

    duties of the Bar Council were to decide all matters concerning

    legal education, qualification for enrolment, discipline and control of

    the profession. It was favourable to the advocates as it gave them

    authority previously held by the judiciary to regulate the

    membership and discipline of their profession.

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    24/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    #K

    The Advocates Act, 1961 was a step to further this very

    initiative. As a result of the Advocates Act, admission, practice,

    ethics, privileges, regulations, discipline and improvement of the

    profession as well as law reform are now significantly in the hands

    of the profession itself.

    FWcL\HH@cdG9 \$]@MH e DGWUD\dM] W\9G$@cdH

    $cF@M b G*1,..,(87 \8)(?1&8+ e W,&,8< 5*1,++&* 5. 5*/(-5+&. (8 +%& H+5+& )(??; $%& A&).(8. 5AA?=,8< 0() .:-% 5*1,..,(8

    %5. +( 0:?0,? -&)+5,8 -(8*,+,(8. >),&0&* >&?('B

    56 M,+,Z&8 (0 @8*,5 b H&- #K4"6456 (0 +%& G-+ A)(/,*&. +%5+ +%& A&).(8 -(8-&)8&* .%(:?*

    >& 5 -,+,Z&8 (0 @8*,5; \/&8 +%& 85+,(85?. (0 (+%&) -(:8+)= 5)& A&)1,++&* +( A)5-+,-&

    ?5' ,8 (:) -(:8+)= 58* 15= >& 5*1,++&* 5. 58 5*/(-5+& (8 5 H+5+& )(??f ,0 -,+,Z&8. (0

    @8*,57 *:?= I:5?,0,&*7 5)& A&)1,++&* +( A)5-+,-& ?5' ,8 +%5+ (+%&) -(:8+)=; $%& A&).(8

    *&.,),8< +( A)5-+,-& ?5' ,8 @8*,5 5. .:-% %5. +( 0:?0,? +%& (+%&) -(8*,+,(8. 5. '&?? 5.

    %5/& >&&8 ?5,* *('8 ,8 G*/(-5+&. G-+7 "QS";

    >6 G&0()& +%& "#+% *5= (0 g5)-%7 "QSR7 0)(1 58= N8,/&).,+= ,8

    +%& +&)),+()= (0 @8*,5f ()

    4,,6 >&0()& +%& "O+% G:

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    25/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    #O

    4,,,6 50+&) +%& "#+% *5= (0 g5)-%7 "QSR7 .5/& 5. A)(/,*&* ,8 .:>U-?5:.& 4,,,567 50+&)

    :8*&)&0()& +%& C".+ *5= (0 V&-&1>&)7 "QRS () %5. A5..&* +%&

    5)+,-?& -?&)3. &J51,85+,(8 () 58= (+%&) &J51,85+,(8 .A&-,0,&* >= +%& ],5= () M5?-:++5 0() &8)(?1&8+ 5. 58 5++()8&= (0 +%5+ ],+5,8&*

    .:-% (+%&) 0()&,

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    26/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    #S

    ]:8*)&* c8?=6 A5=5>?& +( +%& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? 58* W.; "OYhU 4W:A&&. c8&

    ]:8*)&* L,0+= c8?=6 +( +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,57 >= '5= (0 5 >583 *)50+ *)5'8 ,8

    05/(:) (0 +%5+ M(:8-,?B

    F)(/,*&* +%5+ '%&)& .:-% A&).(8 ,. 5 1&1>&) (0 +%& H-%&*:?& M5.+&. () +%&

    H-%&*:?& $),>&. 58* A)(*:-&. 5 -&)+,0,-5+& +( +%5+ &00&-+ 0)(1 .:-% 5:+%(),+= 5. 15=

    >& A)&.-),>&*7 +%& &8)(?1&8+ 0&& A5=5>?& >= %,1 +( +%& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? .%5?? >&

    W.;"YYhU 4W:A&&. c8& ]:8*)&* c8?=6 58* W.; #OhU 4W:A&&. $'&8+= L,/& c8?=6 +(

    +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5;

    $%& D5) M(:8-,? 15= A)&.-),>& +%& I:5?,0,-5+,(8. 0() +%& A:)A(.& (0 5*1,..,(8 5. 58

    5*/(-5+& (8 5 H+5+& )(?? ,8 5**,+,(8 +( I:5?,0,-5+,(8. A)(/,*&* :8*&) H&-+,(8 #K4"64-6 >:+ ,+

    '(:?* 8(+ 1&58 +%5+ .:-% I:5?,0,-5+,(8 '(:?* (/&; $%& G*/(-5+&. G-+7 "QS" &JA)&..?= 5:+%(),.&. +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 +( 5** .:-%

    (+%&) -(8*,+,(8. >= 153,8< 5AA)(A),5+& ):?&.;

    $%& A)(/,.,(8. (0 H&-+,(8 #K4"6406 (0 +%& G-+ 0,J&. &8)(?1&8+ 0&& '%,-% ,. 8(+

    :8-(8.+,+:+,(85?; $%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 ,. &8+,+?&* +( -%5)

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    27/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    #R

    5*/(-5+& .%5?? >& 15*& +( +%& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? ',+%,8 '%(.& E:),.*,-+,(8 +%& 5AA?,-58+

    ',.%&. +( A)5-+,-&;

    W&0&)&8-& (0 5AA?,-5+,(8 +( \8)(?1&8+ M(11,++&&B H&- #S4"6 (0 +%& .5,* G-+ -(8+5,8.

    +%& A)(/,.,(8 +%5+ 5 H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? .%5?? )&0&) &/&)= 5AA?,-5+,(8 0() 5*1,..,(8 5. 58

    5*/(-5+& +( ,+. &8)(?1&8+ -(11,++&&7 58* .:>E&-+ +( +%& A)(/,.,(8. (0 .:>U.&-+,(8. 4#6 58*

    4C6 58* +( 58= *,)&-+,(8 +%5+ 15= >& = 0)5:* () :8*:& ,80?:&8-&7 )&1(/& +%&

    851& (0 .:-% A&).(8 0)(1 +%& )(?? (0 5*/(-5+&. 50+&) &,8& 5--(1A58,&* >= 5 .+5+&1&8+ (0 +%&

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    28/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    #X

    M(:8-,? %5. )&0:.&* 58= 5AA?,-5+,(8 0() 5*1,..,(8 5. 58 5*/(-5+& (8 ,+. )(??7 +%& H+5+& D5)

    M(:8-,? .%5??7 5. .((8 5. 15= >&7 .&8* ,8+,15+,(8 +( 5?? (+%&) H+5+& D5) M(:8-,?. 5>(:+

    .:-% )&0:.5? .+5+,8< +%& 851&7 5**)&.. 58* I:5?,0,-5+,(8. (0 +%& A&).(8 '%(.& 5AA?,-5+,(8

    '5. )&0:.&* 58* +%& &,8< &8)(??&* 5.

    58 5*/(-5+& 5. >&?(' b

    456 $%& A&).(8 -(8-&)8&* .%(:?* 8(+ >& -(8/,-+&* (0 58 (00&8-& ,8/(?/,8< 1()5?

    +:)A,+:*&f

    4>6 $%& A&).(8 -(8-&)8&* .%(:?* 8(+ >& -(8/,-+&* (0 58 (00&8-& :8*&) +%&

    A)(/,.,(8. (0 +%& N8+(:-%5>,?,+= 4c00&8-&.6 G-+7 "QOO 4## (0 "QOO6f

    4-6 $%& A&).(8 -(8-&)8&* .%(:?* 8(+ >& *,.1,..&* () )&1(/&* 0)(1 &1A?(=1&8+ ()

    (00,-& :8*&) +%& H+5+& (8 58= -%5)&7

    )&1(/5?;

    $%& ?&

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    29/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    #Q

    ],& &8)(??&* 5. 58 5*/(-5+& %5. +%& -(8.&I:&8-& (0 .:>.+58-&7

    A)&.-),>,8< *,.I:5?,0,-5+,(8; $%& A)&.-),A+,(8 (0 58 :AA&) 5?& 0() +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 +( .:A&),1A(.& 5 0:)+%&)

    I:5?,0,-5+,(8 >= A:++,8< 58 :AA&) 5

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    30/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    CY

    @+ %5. >&&8 %&?* >= +%& ](8[>?& H:A)&1& M(:)+ (0 @8*,5 ,8 -5.& )&A()+&* ,8 "QRC7 +%5+ N++5)

    F)5*&.% H+5+& 9&= +%& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? (0 N++5)

    F)5*&.%;

    M?5..&. (0 G*/(-5+&.B G. A&) +%& H&- "S4"6 (0 +%& G*/(-5+&. G-+7 "QS"7 +%&)& 5)& +'(

    -?5..&. (0 5*/(-5+&.7 851&?= H&8,() G*/(-5+&. 58* c+%&) G*/(-5+&.; H&- "S4#6 .+5+&.

    +%5+7 ,0 +%& H:A)&1& M(:)+ () 5 ],,?,+=7 .+58*,8< 5+ +%& D5) () .A&-,5? 38('?&*&0()& +%& M(:)+ () $),>:85? () >&0()&

    58= A&).(8 () 5:+%(),+= 1&8+,(8&* ,8 H&-+,(8 CY (0 +%& .5,* G-+; ]& -58 5AA&5) (8?=

    +%)(:

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    31/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    C"

    -58 %& :8*&)+53& -(8/&=58-& '()3 (0 58= 3,8*;

    j G .&8,() 5*/(-5+& ,. 0)&& +( 153& -(8-&..,(8. () ),&0 ,8.+):-+,(8.

    0() +%& A:)A(.& (0 5AA&5),8< >&0()& 58= M(:)+ () $),>:85? () >&0()& 58= A&).(8 ()

    (+%&) 5:+%(),+= ,8 @8*,5;

    j $%& 5*/(-5+& '%( %5. 5-+&* 5. 5 E:8,() 5*/(-5+& ,8 5 &-(1,8< 5 .&8,() 5*/(-5+& 5*/,.&. (8 &0()& +%& "O+% *5= (0 G:

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    32/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    C#

    +,1& &JA)&.. 58 ,8+&8+,(8 ,8 +%& A)&.-),>&* 1588&) +( A)5-+,.& ',+%,8 +%& E:),.*,-+,(8 (0 +%&

    D5) M(:8-,?f

    4>6 5?? (+%&) A&).(8. '%( 5)& 5*1,++&* +( >& 5*/(-5+&. (8 +%& )(?? (0 +%& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,?

    :8*&) +%,. G-+ (8 () 50+&) +%& 5AA(,8+&* *5=;

    G--()*,8< +( H&- "R4#6 (0 +%& .5,* G-+7 +%,. )(?? (0 5*/(-5+&. ,. *,/,*&* ,8+( # A5)+.; $%&

    0,).+ A5)+ ,. 1&58+ 0() +%& 851&. (0 .&8,() 5*/(-5+&. 58* +%& .&-(8* A5)+ ,. 1&58+ 0() +%&

    851&. (0 (+%&) 5*/(-5+&.;

    G--()*,8< +( H&- "R4K6 (0 +%& .5,* G-+ .A&-,0,-5??= A)(/,*&. +%5+ 8( A&).(8 .%5?? >&

    &8)(??&* 5. 5*/(-5+& (8 +%& )(?? (0 1()& +%58 (8& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,?.;

    $%& ):?&. 5. )&&?(' b

    " 456 $%& M(:8-,? 15=7 0)(1 +,1& +( +,1&7 & 8(+&* ,8 +%& .5,* )(??.;

    C H5/& 5. (+%&)',.& *,)&-+&* >= +%& M(:8-,?f 8( (+%&) A5)+,-:?5). .%5?? >& &8+&)&* ,8

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    33/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    CC

    +%& .5,* )(??.;

    K \/&)= A5&5) +%& .,= +%& H+5+& M(:8-,?;

    O G:+%&8+,-5+&* -(A,&. (0 58= 5**,+,(8. () 5?+&)5+,(8. 15*& ,8 +%& )(?? .%5?? >& .&8+ +(

    +%& M(:8-,? ',+%(:+ *&?5=;

    $)58.0&) (0 d51& 0)(1 c8& H+5+& W(?? +( 58(+%&) H+5+& W(??B G--()*,8< +( H&- "X4"6 (0

    G*/(-5+&. G-+7 "QS"7 '%&)& +%& 851& (0 58= A&).(8 '%(.& 851& ,. &8+&)&* 5. 58

    5*/(-5+& (8 +%& )(?? (0 58= H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? 15= 153& 58 5AA?,-5+,(8 ,8 +%& A)&.-),>&*

    0()1 +( +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 0() +%& +)58.0&) (0 %,. 851& 0)(1 +%& )(?? (0 +%5+ H+5+& D5)

    M(:8-,? +( +%& )(?? (0 58= (+%&) H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? 58*7 (8 )&-&,A+ (0 58= .:-% 5AA?,-5+,(8

    +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 .%5?? *,)&-+ +%5+ +%& 851& (0 .:-% A&).(8 .%5?? ',+%(:+ +%&

    A5=1&8+ (0 58= 0&&7 >& )&1(/&* 0)(1 +%& )(?? (0 +%& 0,).+ 1&8+,(8&* H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? 58*

    &8+&)&* ,8 +%& )(?? (0 +%& (+%&) H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? 58* +%& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,?. -(8-&)8&*

    .%5?? -(1A?= ',+% .:-% *,)&-+,(8;

    F)(/,*&* +%5+ '%&)& 58= .:-% 5AA?,-5+,(8 0() +)58.0&) ,. 15*& >= 5 A&).(8 5

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    34/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    CK

    ?5++&) )(?? +( '%,-% %& '5. &8+,+?&* ,8 +%& 0()1&) )(??; @+ ,. +( >& 8(+&* +%5+ +%& 5*/(-5+&

    5AA?=,8< %5. 8(+ +( A5= +%& 0&& (0 58= 3,8* 0() +)58.0&)),8< (0 %,. 851& 0)(1 (8& H+5+& )(??

    +( 58(+%&) H+5+& )(??;

    $%& ?58& &8+&)&* ,8 +%& )(?? (0 +%5+

    H+5+& D5) M(:8-,?7 58* +%& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? -(8-&)8&* .%5?? -(1A?= ',+% .:-% *,)&-+,(8;

    G--()*,8< +( H&- #Y4#6 (0 +%& .5,* G-+7 58= &8+)= ,8 +%& H+5+& )(?? 15*& ,8 -(1A?,58-& ',+%

    +%& *,)&-+,(8 (0 +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 ,. +( >& 15*& ,8 ()*&) (0 .&8,(),+=; @0 58 5*/(-5+&

    5. ,. )&0&))&* +( ,8 H&- #Y (0 +%& G*/(-5+&. G-+7 "QS"7 (1,+. () 05,?. +( &JA)&.. %,.

    ,8+&8+,(8 ',+%,8 +%& A)&.-),>&* +,1&7 %,.h%&) 851& .%5?? >& &8+&)&* ,8 +%& )(?? (0 +%& H+5+&

    D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5;

    G*/(-5+&. (8?= )&-(

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    35/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    CO

    H&- #Q (0 +%& G*/(-5+&. G-+7 "QS"7 ?5=. *('8 +%5+ ^.:>E&-+ +( +%& A)(/,.,(8. (0 +%,. G-+

    58* 58= ):?&. 15*& +%&)& :8*&)7 +%&)& .%5??7 5. 0)(1 +%& 5AA(,8+&* *5=7 >& (8?= (8& -?5..

    (0 A&).(8.7 &8+,+?&* +( A)5-+,-& +%& A)(0&..,(8 ?5'7 851&?= 5*/(-5+&.;

    W,&0()& 58= +),>:85? () A&).(8 ?&&0()& 58= 5:+%(),+= () A&).(8 >&0()& '%(1 .:-% 5*/(-5+& ,. >= () :8*&) 58=

    ?5' 0() +%& +,1& >&,8< ,8 0()-& &8+,+?&* +( A)5-+,.&;

    GAA&5)58-& (0 d(8UG*/(-5+&B N8*&) H&- C# (0 +%& G*/(-5+&. G-+7 "QS" 5 *,.-)&+,(85)=

    A('&) ,.

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    36/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    CS

    (>?,&0()& '%(1 .:-% 5*/(-5+& ,. >= () :8*&)

    58= ?5' 0() +%& +,1& >&,8< &8+,+?&* +( A)5-+,-&; $%&)&0()&7 +%& ),& A&)1,++&*

    +( 5)5.,. (0 5++()8&= :8?&..

    A&)1,++&* :8*&) .A&-,5? -,)-:1.+58-&. >= +%& M(:)+;

    F('&) (0 M(:)+ +( A&)1,+ 5AA&5)58-& (0 58 ,8*,/,*:5?B G. )&&0()& +%& M(:)+ ,8 5

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    37/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    CR

    5*/(-5+& +( A)5-+,.& +%& A)(0&..,(8 (0 ?5' >&0()& 5?? M(:)+.7 $),>:85?.7 5:+%(),+,&. &+-; $%&

    ),&,8< ,8 0()-&7 8( A&).(8 .%5?? (8 () 50+&) +%& 5AA(,8+&* *5=7 >& &8+,+?&* +(

    A)5-+,.& ,8 58= M(:)+ () >&0()& 58= 5:+%(),+= () A&).(8 :8?&.. %&h.%& ,. &8)(??&* 5. 58

    5*/(-5+& :8*&) +%& .5,* G-+_;

    G )&-(

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    38/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    CX

    &&8 ,+,(8 ,. +(

    A)5-+,.& 5. 5 A)(0&..,(8 58* 8(+ 0() 1&)& 5AA&5)58-& ,8 58 ,.(?5+&* -5.&;

    $%& ),& A&)1,++&* +( A)5-+,.& ,8 +%& ],()*,85+& +%&)&+(;

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    39/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    CQ

    G8 $FGH

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    40/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    KY

    $FGH&* 0&& ',+% 9:5 *9795 .7E )HD?

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    41/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    K"

    \5-% H+5+& %5. 5 .7E )HD?

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    42/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    K#

    ';6: )HDE9 4,8 -5.& (0 58 $FGH&0()& +%5+ ';6: )HDE96 () >= +%& *DQE5T5

    )HDE94,8 -5.& (0 +%& $FGH&0()& +%& *DQE5T5 )HDE96; `%,?& +%& -(80&))5? (0

    *5?;HE $FGH&)7 "QSO7 +( +%& D5) M(:8-,? 15,8+5,8,8< +%& )(?? ,8 '%,-% %,. 851& %5. >&&8

    &8+&)&* +%5+ %& *(&. 8(+ *&.,)& +( -(8+,8:& 5. 5 .&8,() 5*/(-5+&7 +%& D5) M(:8-,? 15= & 5?+&)&* 5--()*,8

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    43/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    KC

    IU *DS=U .O $&0()&

    +%& "O+%

    *5= (0 G:6G?? (+%&) A&).(8. '%( 5)& 5*1,++&* +( >& 5*/(-5+&. (8 +%& )(?? (0 +%&

    H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? :8*&) +%,. G-+ (8 () 50+&) +%& 5AA(,8+&* *5=;

    I`4[ \5-% .:-% )(?? (0 5*/(-5+&. .%5?? -(8.,.+ (0 +'( A5)+.7 +%& 0,).+ A5)+ -(8+5,8,8< +%&

    851&. (0 .&8,() 5*/(-5+&. 58* +%& .&-(8* A5)+7 +%& 851&. (0 (+%&) 5*/(-5+&.;

    I`4\\8+),&. ,8 &5-% A5)+ (0 +%& )(?? (0 5*/(-5+&. A)&A5)&* 58* 15,8+5,8&* >= 5 H+5+& D5)

    M(:8-,? :8*&) +%,. .&-+,(8 .%5?? >& ,8 +%& ()*&) (0 .&8,(),+=7 [n58*7 .:>E&-+ +( 58= ):?& +%5+

    15= >& 15*& >= +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 ,8 +%,. >&%5?07 .:-% .&8,(),+= .%5?? >& *&+&)1,8&*6

    5. 0(??('.B U

    456 $%& .&8,(),+= (0 58 5*/(-5+& )&0&))&* +( ,8 -?5:.& 456 .:>U.&-+,(8 4"6 .%5??

    >& *&+&)1,8&* ,8 5--()*58-& ',+% %,. *5+& (0 &8)(??1&8+ :8*&) +%&

    @8*,58 D5) M(:8-,? G-+7 "Q#S 4CX (0 "Q#S6f

    4>6$%& .&8,(),+= (0 58= A&).(8 '%( '5. 5 .&8,() 5*/(-5+& (0 +%& H:A)&1&

    M(:)+ ,11&*,5+&?= >&0()&7 +%& 5AA(,8+&* *5= .%5??7 0() +%& A:)A(.&. (0

    +%& 0,).+ A5)+ (0 +%& H+5+& )(??7 >& *&+&)1,8&* ,8 5--()*58-& ',+% .:-%

    A),8-,A?&. 5. +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 15= .A&-,0=f

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    44/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    KK

    \n4-6 pppo

    4-6 $%& .&8,(),+= (0 58= (+%&) A&).(8 '%(7 (8 () 50+&) +%& 5AA(,8+&* *5=7 ,.

    &8)(??&* 5. 5 .&8,() 5*/(-5+& () ,. 5*1,++&* 5. 58 5*/(-5+& .%5?? >&

    *&+&)1,8&* >= +%& *5+& (0 .:-% &8)(?1&8+ () 5*1,..,(87 5. +%& -5.& 15=

    >&;

    4*6

    L

    n4&6 d(+',+%.+58*,8< 58=+%,8< -(8+5,8&* ,8 -?5:.& 4567 +%& .&8,(),+= (0 585++()8&= &8)(??&* n'%&+%&) >&0()& () 50+&) +%& -(11&8-&1&8+ (0 +%&

    G*/(-5+&. 4G1&8*1&8+6 G-+7 "QXYo 5. 58 5*/(-5+& .%5?? >& *&+&)1,8&*

    ,8 5--()*58-& ',+% +%& *5+& (0 %,. &8)(?1&8+ 5. 58 5++()8&=o

    I`4L d( A&).(8 .%5?? >& &8)(??&* 5. 58 5*/(-5+& (8 +%& )(?? (0 1()& +%58 (8& H+5+& D5)

    M(:8-,?;

    IU *DS=U .O $

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    45/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    KO

    M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 +%5+ +%& 5AA?,-5+,(8 0() +)58.0&) %5. 8(+ >&&8; g5*& >(85 0,*& 58* +%5+ +%&

    +)58.0&) .%(:?* 8(+ >& 15*&7 +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 15=7 50+&) &%5?07 )&E&-+ +%&

    5AA?,-5+,(8;o

    Ia4[L() +%& )&1(/5? (0 *(:>+. ,+ ,. %&)&>= *&-?5)&* +%5+ '%&)& (8 58 5AA?,-5+,(8 15*& >=

    58 5*/(-5+& :8*&) .:>U.&-+,(8 4"67 %,. 851& ,. +)58.0&))&* 0)(1 +%& )(?? (0 (8& H+5+& D5)M(:8-,? +( +%5+ (0 58(+%&)7 %& .%5?? )&+5,8 +%& .51& .&8,(),+= ,8 +%& ?5++&) )(?? +( '%,-% %&

    '5. &8+,+?&* ,8 +%& 0()1&) )(??;

    IU (?=U .O $U.&-+,(8 4C6 (0 H&-+,(8 "R;

    []4\`%&)& 58 5*/(-5+& )&0&))&* +( ,8 .:>U.&-+,(8 4"6 (1,+. () 05,?. +( &JA)&.. %,. ,8+&8+,(8 ',+%,8

    +%& A)&.-),>&* +,1&7 %,. 851& .%5?? >& &8+&)&* ,8 +%& )(?? (0 +%& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? (0 V&?%,;o

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    46/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    KS

    IU *DS=U .O $& )&0&))&* +( +%& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? -(8-&)8&* 0() *&-,.,(8;o

    IU *DS=U .O $= +%& H+5+& D5)

    M(:8-,? (0 &/&)= A&).(8 '%(.& 851& ,. &8+&)&* ,8 +%& )(?? (0 5*/(-5+&. 15,8+5,8&* >= ,+ :8*&) +%,.

    G-+;

    [[4[ \/&)= A&).(8 '%(.& 851& ,. .( &8+&)&* ,8 +%& H+5+& )(?? .%5?? 8(+,0= 58= -%58

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    47/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    KR

    [\4LH:>E&-+ +( +%& A)(/,.,(8. (0 .:>U.&-+,(8 4"67In4#67 4C6 58* 4CG6o +%& $FGH= +%&,) )&.A&-+,/& .&8,(),+=;

    [\4bH:>E&-+ 5. 50()&.5,*U

    M;N H&8,() 5*/(-5+&. .%5?? %5/& A)&U5:*,&8-& (/&) (+%&) 5*/(-5+&.f 58*

    M;;N

    $%& ),& *&+&)1,8&* >= +%&,) )&.A&-+,/& .&8,(),+=;

    IU (?=U .O $& 5*1,++&* 5. 58 5*/(-5+& (8 5 H+5+& )(??7 ,0 %& 0:?0,??. +%& 0(??(',8< -(8*,+,(8.7

    851&?=B U

    [L4I M7N ]& ,. 5 -,+,Z&8 (0 @8*,5B

    F)(/,*&* +%5+ .:>E&-+ +( +%& (+%&) A)(/,.,(8. -(8+5,8&* ,8 +%,. G-+7 5 85+,(85? (0 58= (+%&)

    -(:8+)= 15= >& 5*1,++&* 5. 58 5*/(-5+& (8 5 H+5+& )(??7 ,0 -,+,Z&8. (0 @8*,57 *:?= I:5?,0,&*7

    5)& A&)1,++&* +( A)5-+,.& ?5' ,8 +%5+ (+%&) -(:8+)=f

    [L4I MSN]& %5. -(1A?&+&* +%& 5U-?5:.& 4,,,6 G0+&)

    :8*&)

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    48/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    KX

    M;;;7NG0+&) :8*&)5)),.+&) 58* ,. -5??&* +( +%& D5) (8 () >&0()& +%& C"

    .+*5= (0 V&-&1>&)7 "QRS

    \n()

    %5. A5..&* +%& 5)+,-?&* -?&)3.[ &J51,85+,(8 () 58= (+%&) &J51,85+,(8 .A&-,0,&* >= +%& ],5= () M5?-:++5 0() &8)(?1&8+ 5. 58 5++()8&= (0 +%5+ ],+5,8&* .:-% (+%&) 0()&,583 *)50+ *)5'8 ,8 05/(:) (0 +%5+ M(:8-,?oB

    @0 '%&)& .:-% A&).(8 ,. 5 1&1>&) (0 +%& H-%&*:?&* M5.+&. () +%& H-%&*:?&* $),>&. 58*

    A)(*:-&. 5 -&)+,0,-5+& +( +%& &00&-+ 0)(1 .:-% 5:+%(),+= 5. 15= >& b.-),>&*7 +%& &8)(?1&8+

    0&& A5=5>?& >= %,1 +( +%& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? .%5?? >&K

    n(8& %:8*)&* ):A&&. 58* +( +%& D5)M(:8-,? (0 @8*,57 +'&8+=U0,/& ):A&&.o;

    `c"YQ87?79;H? bL() +%& A:)A(.&. (0 +%,. .:>U.&-+,(87 5 A&).(8 .%5?? >& *&&1&* +( %5/&

    (>+5,8&* 5 *&= +%& N8,/&).,+= (8 ,+. 8(+,-&U>(5)* ()

    (+%&)',.& *&-?5),8< %,1 +( %5/& A5..&* +%5+ &J51,85+,(8o;

    [L4[d(+',+%.+58*,8< 58=+%,8< -(8+5,8&* ,8 .:>.&-+,(8 4"6an5 T53,? () 5 A?&5*&) '%( ,. 5

    ?5' & 5*1,++&* 5. 58 5*/(-5+& (8 5 H+5+& )(??7 ,0 %&

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    49/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    KQ

    M7Ng53&. 58 5AA?,-5+,(8 0() .:-% &8)(?1&8+ ,8 5--()*58-& ',+% +%& )&/,.,(8. (0 +%,.

    G-+7 8(+ ?5+&) +%58 +'( =&5). 0)(1 +%& 5AA(,8+&*7 *5=7 58*

    MSNL:?0,??. +%& -(8*,+,(8. .A&-,0,&* ,8 -?5:.&. 4567 4>6 58* 406 (0 .:>.&-+,(8 4"6

    JcM\Nd(+',+%.+58*,8< 58=+%,8< -(8+5,8&* ,8 .:>.&-+,(8 4"6 5 A&).(8 '%(U

    M7NI]

    np p po %5.7 0() 5+ ?&5.+ +%)&& =&5).7 >&&8 5 /53,? () 5 A?&5*&) () 5 1:3%+5) ()'5. &8+,+?&* 5+ 58= +,1& +( >& &8)(??&* :8*&) 58= ?5' `np p po 5. 58 5*/(-5+& (0 5

    ],& &8)(??&* 5. 58 5*/(-5+& :8*&) 58= ):?& 15*& >= +%& D5)

    M5NM(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 ,8 +%,. >&%5?07 15= >& 5*1,++&* 5. 58 5*/(-5+& (8 5 H+5+& )(?? ,0

    %&U

    M;Ng53&. 58 5AA?,-5+,(8 0() .:-% &8)(?1&8+ ,8 5--()*58-& ',+% +%& A)(/,.,(8. (0 +%,.

    G-+f 58*

    M;;NL:?0,??. +%& -(8*,+,(8. .A&-,0,&* ,8 -?5:.&. 4567 4>67 4&6 58* 406 (0 .:>U.&-+,(8

    I\cMLN d d de

    IU (?=U .O $

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    50/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    OY

    \U (?=U .O $

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    51/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    O"

    [L4[$d(+%,8< -(8+5,8&* ,8 .:>U.&-+,(8 4"6 .%5?? 5AA?= +( 5 A&).(8 '%( %5/,8< >&&8 0(:8* = +%& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? ,8 +%,. >&%5?0o .:-%

    -(11,++&& .%5?? *,.A(.& (0 +%& 5AA?,-5+,(8 ,8 +%& A)&.-),>&* 1588&)B

    [nF)(/,*&* +%5+ +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 15=7 ,0 .5+,.0,&*7 &,+%&) (8 5 )&0&)&8-& 15*& +( ,+ ,8

    +%,. >&%5?0 () (+%&)',.&7 +%5+ 58= A&).(8 %5. = 1,.)&A)&.&8+5+,(8 5. +( 58 &..&8+,5? 05-+ () >= 0)5:* () :8*:& ,80?:&8-&7 )&1(/& +%&

    851& (0 .:-% A&).(8 0)(1 +%& )(?? (0 5*/(-5+&. 50+&) &,8&

    5--(1A58,&* >= 5 .+5+&1&8+ (0 +%& U.&-+,(8 4#6 ,8 -(80()1,+= ',+% +%& (A,8,(8 (0 +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5;

    [[K4L

    `%&)& +%& &8)(?1&8+ -(11,++&& (0 5 H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? %5. )&0:.&* 58= 5AA?,-5+,(8 0()

    5*1,..,(8 5. 58 5*/(-5+& (8 ,+. )(??7 +%& H+5+& D5) M(:8-,? .%5?? 5. .((8 5. 15= >&7 .&8*

    ,8+,15+,(8 +( 5?? (+%&) H+5+& D5) M(:8-,?. 5>(:+ .:-% )&0:.5? .+5+,8< +%& 851&7 5**)&.. 58*

    I:5?,0,-5+,(8. (0 +%& A&).(8 '%(.& 5AA?,-5+,(8 '5. )&0:.&* 58* +%&

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    52/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    O#

    IU (?=U .O $&&8 )&-&,/&* +( +%5+ &00&-+;6

    IU *DS=U SO $& *,.A(.&* (0 >=

    +%& &8)(?1&8+ -(11,++&& (0 +%& D5) M(:8-,?f

    MFN$%& -(8*,+,(8. .:>E&-+ +( '%,-% 5 A&).(8 15= >& 5*1,++&* 5. 58 5*/(-5+& (8 58=

    .:-% )(??B

    M5N$%& ,8.+,?1&8+. ,8 '%,-% +%& &8)(?1&8+ 0&& 15= >& A5,*;

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    53/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    OC

    [a4\ d( ):?&. 15*& :8*&) +%,. M%5A+&) .%5?? %5/& &00&-+ :8?&.. +%& D5) M(:8-,? (0 @8*,5 %5.

    5AA)(/&* +%&1;

    IU +T;995F SO $

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    54/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    OK

    IU +T;995F SO $& A&)1,++&* +( A)5-+,.& ,8 +%& ],()*,85+& +%&)&+(;

    I\L4I$$%& ],

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    55/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    OO

    158795F )7=5= g 15

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    56/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    OS

    355Q7W $667EP78 Z= h5=:7G h7D=:;W 7?F +9:5E=C );G;8 $QQ578 VDE;=F;?&;;; @+ '(:?* >& 0() %,1 +( *&-,*& '%&87 +( '%(17 +( '%5+ &J+&8+

    58* (8 '%5+ +&)1. 58* -(8*,+,(8. %& .%(:?* 5??(+ ):7TS5E=;

    ) 17G;= +%(.& 1&1>&). (0 +%& A:>?,- '%( )&I:,)& +%&,) .&)/,-&.;

    @8 +%& 15++&) (0 .7SD 3;P7W7E AE7=7F B;9:78C $(1 IJ[L $88 [b\B $FGH- 0&33&-%, -.%

    9%)3+34 -.)-< ?@.&%5%2 -.% 1%2,&3 9)6 /%< .&*%5%2 A+4. .% &2 ,.% +,< 3& &3% +, )/&5%

    -.% $)* 3&-*+-.,-)38+34 .&* 1&*%2'#$ )38 .&* 2+0. .% &2 ,.% 9)6 /%:B ;.%2% 0)3 /% 3&

    "#$% &' ()* #3$%,, -.% /#$*)2C &' -.)- 42)38 0&30%1- ?-.% D- &' E#,-+0% )2% C%1-

    )$+5% )- +3,-+-#-+&3, /2%)-.+34 '2%%8&9< &1%33%,, )38 =#,-+0%: F& ,&0+%-6 0)3 %G+,-

    *+-.- $)*, )38 $)*, .)5% 3& 9%)3+34< +' -.%6 0)33&- /% %3'&20%8: >- +, -.2. -.%

    D-, -.)- -.% 2#$% &' $)* 2%5%)$, +-, 9%)3+34'#$ 0&3-%3-: ;.% >38+)3 D&3,-+-#-+&3 +,

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    57/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    OR

    /),%8 #1&3 -.% 0&30%1- &' "#$% &' ()* )38 '&2 )0.+%5+34 -.+, 0.%2+,.%8 4&)$< -.%

    '2)9%2, &' >38+)3 D&3,-+-#-+&3 .), ),,+43%8 -.% ,1%0+)$ -),C -& -.% =#8+0+)26: ;.%

    =#8+0+)26 +, -.% 4#)28+)3 &' -.% "#$% &' ()*: A%30% =#8+0+)26 +, 3&- -.% -.+28 1+$$)2 /#-

    -.% 0%3-2)$ 1+$$)2 &' -.% 8%9&02)-+0 ,-)-%: H3 +38%1%38%3- &2 +91)2-+)$ E#8+0+)26 +, -.%

    !"#$ &'( #)# )' ) .%)$-.6 ,&0+%-6: >- +, -.% $),- 2%,&2- '&2 -.% 0&99&3 1%&1$% &' ) 0-263 U1KD71 415D56221K

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    64/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    SK

    ;.% H1%G D- +3 89LK T/"!!( I),.%$8 -.)- +' -.% $)*

    '+38, &3% -& /% 4#+$-6 &' 0&3-%91- )38 .% /&*, 8&*3 -& -.% =#849%3- &' -.% 0- -.)- +,

    3&- )36 )8%W#)-% %G12%,,+&3 &' )1&$&46:

    H1&$&46 +, )3 )0- &' 0&3-2+-+&3 )38 +- 9#,- 3&- /% ,.&23 &' 1%3+-%30%: ;%38%2+34 &'

    )1&$&46 0)33&- /% ) 1)3)0%) +3 %5%26 0),% &' 0&3-%91-: >3 3

    89;8 - +, +3-%38%8

    -& /% %5+8%30% &' 2%)$ 0&3-2+/#-+&3< -.% 9)3$6 0&3,0+,3%,, &' ) *2&34 8&3%< &' )3

    +3=#26 +3'$+0-%8 )38 -.% %)23%,- 8%,+2% -& 9)C% ,#0. 2%1)2)-+&3 ), $+%, +3 -.% *2&34

    8&%2Y, 1&*%2: [3$6 -.%3 +- +, &' )36 )5)+$ +3 ) 0- &' E#,-+0%: K#- /%'&2% +- 0)3 .)5% -.)-

    %''%0-< +- ,.$8 /% -%38%2%8 )- -.% %)2$+%,- 1&,,+/$% ,-)4%< 3&- -.% $)-%,-: O5%3 +' *+,8&9

    8)*3, &3$6 )- ) $)-%2 ,-)4%< -.% )1&$&46 ,.$8 /% -%38%2%8 #32%,%25%8$6 )38

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    65/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    SO

    #30&38+-+&3)$$6< /%'&2% -.% E#84% .), +38+0)-%8 -.% -2%38 &' .+, 9+38: a3$%,, -.)- +,

    8&3%< 3&- &3$6 +, -.% -%38%2%8 )1&$&46 2&//%8 &' )$$ 42)0% /#- +- 0%),%, -& /% )3 )1&$&46:

    >- 0%),%, -& /% -.% '#$$< '2)3C )38 9)3$6 0&3'%,,+&3 &' ) *2&34 8&3%< *.+0. +- +, +3-%38%8

    -& /% QS# +.$ B(++$/ ), Y"/$# -)!$7 89;9 J/1 =1F1 KU (+ D1 K? J(CM1 H1&$&46 9#,- /%

    5&$#3-)26< #30&38+-+&3)$ )38 +38+0)-+5% &' 2%9&2,% )38 0&3-2+-+&3 )38 +- ,.$8 /%

    -%38%2%8 )- -.% %)2$+%,- &11&2-#3+-6 Q-.(CN.(#5/( Z(#6(5.(/ Z.(+$ 01 - +, 3&- 3%0%,,)26 -.)- %5%26 )1&$&46 +, -& /% )00%1-%8 /6 -.% 0-: H 0- 0)3 2%'#,%

    -& )00%1- )3 )1&$&46 *.+0. +- 8&%, 3&- /%$+%5% -& /% 4%3#+3%< +- 0)3< %5%3 *.%3 +- )00%1-,

    -.% )1&$&46< 0&99+- )3 &''%38%2 -& 12+,&3 &2 &-.%2*+,% 1#3+,. .+9:

    ;.% D- +3 [12 YLK17D PR 1 89L? ACC 8L? (+ D1 8L: ) .%$8 -.)- *.)- 9)6

    )11%)2 -& ) ,&1.+,-+0)-%8 9+38 ), .)2,.< 2.< 2#8% )38 #30-.< 9)6 3&- /% ,& -&

    #3,&1.+,-+0)-%8 )38 %5%3 -& )3426 +22+-)-%8< )38 /2&&8+34: ;.%2% +, 3&-.+34 -& .&$8 -.)-

    -.% &11&3%3- *), )0-#)-%8 /6 8%,+2% -& 8+,2%1#-% 3&- ,#2% )/- .+, )/+$+-6 -& %G12%,,

    *.)- .% '%%$, =#,- &2 #3=#,-: a38%2 -.%,% 0+20#9,-)30%,< -.%2% +, 3& .%,+-)-+&3 +3

    )00%1-+34 .+, )1&$&46:

    ;.% D- 9)6 &2 9)6 3&- )00%1- )3 )1&$&46 4&%, -& ,%3-%30% )38 0)33&-< -.%2%'&2%< /%

    )00%1-%8 *+-.- ) '+38+34 -.)- 0&3-%91- .), /%%3 0&99+--%8: A&*%5%2< )1&$&46 89IK *J I8U)K#- -.% 0&3-%91- /6 ) ,%3+&2 $)*6%2 0$8

    3&- /% +43&2%8: ;.% 5+-#1%2)-+5% $)34#)4% *), -.% -0&9% &' ) 8%'%)-%8 H85&0)-%

    *.+0. )11%)2%8 -& /% ) 5%26 ,%2+, 9)--%2 -& -.% A+4. D-: ;.% 9)--%2 /%0&9%,

    9&2% ,%2+, *.%3 +- .), .)11%3%8 +3 ) B),'!!"C DC(N$ *.%2% -.%2% )2% &3% &2 -*&

    0-, )38 ) '%* $)*6%2,< )38 -.% $+-+4)-+34 1#/$+0 +, 9&,-$6 +$$+-%2)-% &2 1&&2$6

    %8#0)-%8< -.%2%'&2% #38%2 ,#0. 0+20#9,-)30%, 0&3-%91- +, 3&- -& /% +43&2%8 &2 )$$&*%8

    -& 1),, /6 Q>(B( E(\(C7 W(/](/.( 01 G.$ *+(+$ ), W(5.\( 1 89I: *J 9O8 (+

    D1 9O9)

    (%"(['

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    69/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    SQ

    -.%9,%$5%, +3 0-< )38 +3 %)0. 0),%: >3 )3 &1%3 =#,-+0% ,6,-%9< 3& =#84% )38 3& 0-

    0)3 )5&+8 02+-+0+,9< ')+2 &2 '$: (&28 H-C+3 &30% ,)+8< ?E#,-+0% +, 3&- ) 0$&+,-%2%8 5+2-#%`

    ,.% 9#,- /% )$$&*%8 -& ,#''%2 -.% ,02#-+36 )38 2%,1%0-'#$< %5%3 -.. -,1&C%3- )+8%, -& 9)C% -.%

    12&0%,, &' )89+3+,-%2+34 =#,-+0% %G1%8+-+, ), *%$$ ), #1.&$8, -.% 8+43+-6 )38 ')+-. -.%

    1%&1$% .)5% /%,-&*%8 +3 -.% =#8+0+)$ ,6,-%9 &' -.% 0-26: >3 +-,%$'< +- )/,-)+3, '2&9 )36

    '&29 &' )2/+-2)2+3%,,: >- 4+5%, %5%26 &24)3+7)-+&3 &2 +38+5+8#)$ 0.)24%8 #38%2 -.% )0-

    2%),&3)/$% 42&, -& 8%'%38 +- &2 .+9,%$'< ), -.% 0),% 9)6 /%: ;.% 2%,-2+0-+&3,< +-

    +91&,%,< +, =#,- )38 ')+2 +3 -.%9: e&2%&5%2< +- 2%0&43+7%, -.% %W#)$ '&&-+34 &' )$$ 1%&1$%

    +3 -.% 0-26 /6 /2+34+34 -.% =#8+0+)26 )38 +-, &''+0+)$, *+-.+3 +-, )9/+-:

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    70/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    RY

    CONTEMPT

    An act of deliberate disobedience or disregard for the laws ,

    regulations, or decorum of a public authority such as a court

    or legislative body.

    CONTEMPT OF COURT

    It is a behaviour that opposes or defies the authority, justice

    and dignity of the court. Contempt charges may be brought

    against parties to proceedings; lawyer or other court officers;

    witness; or people who insert themselves in a case, such as

    protesters outside a court room. Courts have great leeway in

    making contempt charges , and thus confusion sometimes

    exist about the distinction between types of contempt .

    Generally , however, contempt proceedings are categorized as

    civil or criminal.

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    71/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    R"

    SECTION 2 ON THE CONTEMPT OF COURTS ACT

    1971

    a)Contempt of Court means civil contempt or criminal

    contempt.

    b) Civil contempt means wilful disobedience to any

    judgement , decree, direction , order , writ or other

    process of a court or wilful breach of an undertaking

    given to a court.

    c)

    Criminal contempt means the publication (whether by

    words, spoken, or written ,or by signs , or by visible

    representation or otherwise) of any matter or the doing of

    any other act whatsoever which.

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    72/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    R#

    i. Scandalizes or tends to scandalise , or lowers or tends

    to lower the authority of , any court;

    ii. Prejudices , or interferes or tends to interfere with due

    course of any judicial proceeding.

    iii.

    Interferes or tends to interfere with , or obstructs or

    tends to obstruct , the administration of justice in any

    other manner.

    CRIMINAL CONTEMPT CHARGES

    Criminal contempt charges become separate charges from the

    underlying case . Unlike civil contempt sanctions, criminal

    contempt charges may live or after resolution of theunderlying case.

    One charged with criminal contempt generally gets the

    constitutional rights guaranteed to criminal defendants ,

    including the right to counsel, right to put on a defence, and

    the right to a jury trial in certain cases. Charges of criminal

    contempt must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    73/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    RC

    However incarceration of contempt may begin immediately,

    before the contempt charge is adjudicated and the sentence

    decided. Depending on the jurisdiction and the case, the same

    judge who decided to charge a person with contempt may end

    up residing over the contempt proceedings.

    Criminal contempt can bring punishment including jail time

    and / or a fine.

    DR. DC. SAXENA V/S HONBLE CHIEF JUSTICE OFINDIA

    In a clash of competing interests in constitutional contours,

    this case calls to strike a balance between the freedom of

    speech and expression, a salutary right in aliberal

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    74/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    RK

    democratic society and paramount countervailing duty to

    maintain public confidence in the administration of justice.

    The petitioner has initiated public interest litigation under

    Article 32 of the Constitution to direct Sri P.V. NarasimhaRao, the President of Indian National Congress and the former

    Prime Minister of the country to pay a sum of Rs.8.29 lakhsand odd said to be due to the union of Indian for use of Indian

    Air Force aircraft or helicopters from October 1, 1993 to

    November 30, 1993. Whenwrit PetitionNo. 432/95 was

    posted for hearing on July 17,1995 before the learned Chief

    Justice of India and brother Justice S.C. Sen the solicitor

    General for India, Shri Dipankar P. Gupta was sent for and the

    Court directed him to have the averments verified to becorrect and directed the petition to be listed after two weeks.On August 7,1995, the writ petition came before the Bench

    comprising the learned CJI, Justice S.C. Sen and Justice K.S.Paripoornan. It is not in dispute that the Solicitor General had

    placed the record before the Court and upon perusal thereofand after hearing the petitioner-in-person, the Bench

    summarily "dismissed"" the writ petition which had triggeredthe petitioner to file yet another writ petition, this time againstthe learned Chief Justice of India, Justice A.M. Ahmadi. The

    Registry raised objections for its maintainability but, at eh

    insistence of the petitioner, it was posted, with officeobjections, for hearing, as unregistered Writ petition (c) NO. -

    17209/95 on January 13,1996 before a Bench of three learned

    Judges, viz. Justice J.S. Bharuchal. The petitioner, again

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    75/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    RO

    appearing in person, persisted to justify the averments madeagainst the learned CJI, Justice A.M. Ahmadi in the writ

    petition. In spite of the Court having pointed out that theaverments were scandalous, the proceeding of the Court did

    indicate that the petitioner reiterated that he "stood by the

    averments made therein" and sought for declaration [1] thatJustice A.M. Ahmadi is unfit to hold the office as Chief

    Justice of India; [2] that he should be tripped of hiscitizenship; [3] to direct registration of an FIR against him

    under various provisions of Indian penal Code for committing

    forgery and fraud and under the prevention of Corruption Act;(4) to direct prosecution of him under the prevention of

    Corruption Act; (5) to direct him to defray from his personalpocket the expenses incurred by the petitioner in filing the two

    writ petitions, i.e., W.P. No. 432/95 and the second writpetition; (6) to direct justice A.M. Ahmadi to reimburse fromhis pocket to the public exchequer the entire loss caused to the

    State,. as a consequence of non-payment of the dues by SriP.V. Narasimha Rao with interest at 18% per annum and (7)

    other consequential directions. After hearing the petitioner,the Bench dismissed the second writ petition with the order as

    under: "The several averments in the writ petition are

    scandalous and it is surprising that the petitioner, who is saidto be a Professor in a University, has chosen to draft and file

    such a writ petition. His understanding of the meaning of

    Article 32 of the Constitution, is to say the least, preposterous.

    The allegations made are reckless and disclose irresponsibility

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    76/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    RS

    on the part of the petitioner. This writ petition is wholly

    misconceived and is an abuse of the process of the Court. The

    writ petition has no merit. The writ petition is, therefore,

    dismissed. In view of the attitude of the petitioner even at thehearing, when the persisted in this stand and, on our asking

    him, reiterated that he stood by the scandalous averment madetherein, we consider it our duty to issue to the petitioner a

    notice to show cause why proceedings to punish him for

    contempt of this Court should not be initiated against him.The Registry to take the necessary steps for registering the

    matter as a contempt petition. The petitioner who is present-in-person is given notice of the contempt petition. He is

    required to file his reply within four wheels to show causewhy proceedings for contempt should not be initiated against

    him. We request the learnedSolicitor General to assist the

    Court in this contempt matter.List the matter after notice ofthe date fixed by Registry is given to Dr. D.C. Saxena and the

    Solicitor

    General."

    While dismissing the petition, this Court observed in the later

    part of the order the petitioner's conduct in his persistence tostand by the scandalous averments made against the learnedChief Justice of India. This Court was constrained to initiate

    contempt proceedings and enlisted 14 instances which would

    prima facie constitute contumacious conduct of the petitioner

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    77/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    RR

    to scandalise the Court. In the meanwhile, the petitioner wrotein a newspaper criticising Justice J.S. Verma. Resultantly,

    Justice J.S. Verma reclused himself from the Bench. Thus thematter was posted before this Bench.

    On April 12,1996, the petitioner filed his reply to the showcause notice styling the same as "preliminary submissions"

    and reiterated his averments, which, as pointed by this Court,

    would constitute scandalisation of the Court and yet he had

    given his justification for accusing the chief Justice of India.However, at the end, as a foot-note, he has written in his ownhand-writing as under: "N.B. If some passages seem strindent

    or pungent, the defendantis willing to suitably modify them."

    On April 14,1996, this court passed the order as under;"Pursuant to the notice issued by this Court the Contemnor

    Dr. D.C.Saxena is present today in person. He has stated that

    he would modify the offending portions noted in the showcause notice in Item (ii),(iv) (vi), (vii), (viii), (x),(xii),(xiii)

    and wishes to withdraw unconditionally item (xiv), paras B

    and C. The learned Solicitor General has pointed out that evenif the Contemnor withdraws or files statement in the modified

    form what the Court required to do is whether his statementsmade in the writ petition originally filed constitute contempt

    of the Court or not statements would not be of materialrelevance for consideration. Since the contemnor seeks timeto submit the show contemnor seeks time to submit the show

    cause in the modified language which he wishes to place

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    78/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    RX

    before the court, at his request the matter is adjourned to may2,1996 at 2.00p.m. The Registry is directed to supply

    complete set of papers to learned solicitor General."

    When the case came up for hearing on May 2, 1996, the

    petitioner filed amended portions to substitute the avermentsmade, at proper places, in the second unnumbered writ

    petition. We have heard learned Solicitor General as amicus

    curiae and the petitioner-in-person. Before opening the case,

    the solicitor General, in view of the seriousness of theaverments made by the petitioner in the petition filed againstthe chief Justice of India, and in view of his stand in both the

    preliminary submissions to the contempt notice and therevised averments made in the writ petition, suggested that it

    would be advantageous for the petitioner to have consultationand legal assistance of any counsel of his choice and to revise

    his stand, but the petitioner remained silent and got along with

    the case. The learned solicitor General stated that on July 17,1995, the Court had sent for and called upon him to have the

    allegations made in the first writ petition, verified and to placethe factual position before the Court. Pursuant thereto, on

    August 7,1995, he had placed the record before the Court

    which are confidential in nature. After their perusal andhearings the petitioner, the Court did not think it necessary to

    issue the directions as sought for. At this stage, we would

    point out that when Sri P.V. Narasimha Rao, as president of

    Indian National Congress

    or as the former prime Minister,

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    79/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    RQ

    was alleged to have used the defence aircrafts, this Courtobviously was of the view that the relationship between the

    two wings of the Government or the political party, i.e., theIndian national Congress is of debtor and creditor and that,

    therefore, prerogative writ under Article 32 of the

    Constitution would not lie to enforce contractual duesadjustable as per their practice. The exercise of the power

    under Article 32 was, therefore, obviously thought to beuncalled for. Supreme Court being the highest Judicial forum,

    the need to record reasons is obviated since there is no further

    appeal against the order of this Court. Recording reasons isnot, therefore, necessary nor is called for.

    The learned solicitor General, therefore, contended that when

    the Court dismissed the writ petition, the petitioner, being aprofessor of English in Chandigarh University, should have

    exercised restraint and felt duty- bound not to proceed further

    in the matter. Instead, he filed the second writ petition withallegations which are ex-facie contumacious. The petitioner

    reiterated the same in his preliminary submissions to thenotice of the contempt. His modified statement filed on April

    24,1996 itself is not relevant. What would be material and

    relevant for consideration is whether the allegations madeagainst the learned Chief Justice of India in the Second Writ

    petition do constitute contempt of the Court. The modified

    stand, therefore, is not relevant to adjudge whether thepetitioner has committed contempt of this Court. The Court,

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    80/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    XY

    therefore, has to consider the totality of the averments andtheir effect on the judicial process to adjudge the conduct of

    the petitioner to be contumacious. The petitioner contendedthat he did not seek any personal gain for himself. As a duty-

    bound citizen, he was actuated to see that the public dues are

    recovered from any person how-so-high he may be. To thebest of his understanding, the petitioner made the averments

    for public good and he has no intention to scandalise theCourt. He had approached this Court earlier more than 12

    times to vindicate public justice. As a human being, he is

    fallible but he has no intention to denigrate the Court to whichhe has highest respect. His modified language in the statement

    filed on April 24,1996 does indicate his intention.

    In the proceedings of the Court dated July, 17,1995, it wasrecorded that the Solicitor General had appeared for Sri P.V.

    Narasimha Rao who was impleaded in his personal capacity.

    It is the petitioner's contention that the solicitor Generalcannot appear for him. He was not assisting the Court as

    amicus. When the Chief justice called for the records from theGovernment through solicitor General, it is Court's duty to

    give him copies of those documents but the same were denied

    to him. It is his xiv) Page 9 prayer

    (a) Declare the respondent unfit to holdofficeas chief Justice

    of

    India;

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    81/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    X"

    (b) Strip the respondent of his citizenship;

    (c) Direct the registration of an F.I.R. against the respondent

    under the Indian penal Code for committingforgery and fraud;

    (d) Direct the respondent'sprosecutionunder thepreventionofcorruption Act.

    The alleged contemnor filed written submissions in reply tothe contempt notice. His first submission was that the Bench

    which had heard and dismissed the second writ petition hadbeen constituted by the respondent, who had thereby become

    a judge in his own cause. The second writ petition was,

    accordingly, not listed before a court, competent to dispose itof, so that the order of its dismissal was non est, and it was

    still deemed to be pending. The contempt notice was,

    therefore, premature. The written submissions then dealt withthe portions of the second writ petition which had been

    indicated in the contempt notice and reiterated the same,except only that it was submitted that the allegation about

    fabrication of the court proceedings of 7th August, 1995, was"somewhat unhappily would". It was submitted thereafter thatthe contempt of Courts Act was a legacy of British

    imperialism and, while appropriate to a "banana republic",

    was imcompatible with a democratic, people's polity; it was a

    law-less law because it fused the offices of the prosecutor andthe judge and "belongs with the infamous Spanish

    inquisition". After his signature at the foot of the written

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    82/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    X#

    submissions, the alleged contemnor added in hand, "N.B. Ifsome passages seem strident or pungent, the defendant is

    willing to suitably modify them."

    The contempt notice came up before this Bench on 15th April,

    1996. The following order was then passed; "Pursuant to thenotice issued by

    this court the Contemnor Dr. D.C.. Saxena is present today in

    person. He has stated that he would modify the offendingportions noted in the show cause notice in Item (ii),(iv),(vi),

    (vii),(viii),(x),(xi),(xii),(xiii) and wishes to withdrew

    unconditionally item xiv, paras B and C. The learned SolicitorGeneral has pointed out that even if the Contemnor withdraws

    or files statement in the modified form what the Courtrequired to do is whether originally filed constitute contempt

    of the statements would not be of material reliance time to

    submit the show cause in the modified Court, at his request ehmatter is adjourned to may 2,1996 at 2.00 P.M. The Registry

    is directed to supply complete set of papers to learned

    Solicitor

    General."

    extract the relevant portions supplied to him by show causeand his reply thereto and of preliminary submissions and his

    modified statement as a substitution to the averments made inthe second writ petition and the effect thereof. In respect of

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    83/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    XC

    the averments made in the offending portions of item 1,3,5,9,13 and 14(a) and (d), the petitioner stood by them. He

    submitted his modified statement on April 24,1996 only forthe rest of the statements. Let us first consider the unmodified

    averments before examining the original and the modified

    averments. The first averment made at page 4 in paragraph 9

    is that "it was improper for justiceAhmadi to hear it". Item 3

    at page 6 in paragraph 14 is: "To this Justice Ahmadi

    responded that he (the solicitor General) was there to assistthe Court, contrary to the evidence of the court proceedings".

    Item 5 relating to the averments made in page 6 in paragraph17 is; "the subsequent course of action by Justice Ahmadi, in

    dealing with the grouse of the petitioner and dismissing hispetition is totally unjust, unfair, arbitrary and unlawful. It is inflagrant violation of the mandates of Article 14 of the

    constitution, which "runs like a golden thread" through it ad is

    the foundation of justice and fair play". Item 9 relating to the

    averments made at page 8 in paragraph 18(f) is: "what are thelegal consequences of the violation of the sacred oath of office

    by justice Ahmadi?" Item 14(a) relating to the prayer portionis: "declare the respondent (justice A.M. Ahmadi) unfit tohold office as Chief Justice of India" and item 14(d) is:

    "Direct the respondent's (Justice A.M. Ahmadi's) prosecutionunder the prevention of Corruption Act." The petitioner in his

    affidavit filed in support of the second writ petition has stated

    in para 2 thereof thus: "I am actuated purely by national

    interests and no personal gains and have truthfully and

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    84/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    XK

    carefully stated the facts (emphasis supplied), in pursuance ofmy fundamental duties, which can be effectively performed

    only through the fundamental rights enjoyed as a citizen ofIndia." In his preliminary submissions, he has stated that the

    writ petition under Article 32 shall be heard by a Division

    Court of not less than 5 Judges. Emphasis was added by thepetitioner himself. Since the writ petition was not listed before

    a Court components to dispose of the same, it made the orderof dismissal non est and it should be deemed to be pending

    and is "not yet decided and disposed of constitutionally". No

    contempt proceedings can, therefore, be initiated. The noticeis , therefore, pre-mature. Constitution of the Bench by the

    chief Justice is in violation of the principles of natural justiceas no one can be a judge of his own cause. Justice "should not

    only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly seem tobe done. nothing is to be done which creates even a suspicionthat there has been an improper interference of the course of

    justice.", he quoted the above statement of Lord Heward, C.J.Regarding Item 1 referred to hereinbefore; he justified the

    imputation stating that no person can be a Judge in his owncause directly or indirectly. In spite of his objection, the

    respondent (CJI) chose to constitute the bench himself as a

    presiding judge. According to the petitioner the word "improper", therefore was used in that perspective, with regard

    to the averments made in Item 3, his reply was that the Court

    proceedings dated July 17,1995 recording that the solicitor

    General, Shri Dipankar Gupta appeared in his official capacity

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    85/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    XO

    to Sri P.V. Narasimha Rao, a private party. He had stated thateven assuming, though not conceding, that he (Solicitor

    General was acting as amicus curiae also was not recorded inthe Court proceedings. Therefore, his comment that CJI had

    Fabricated false record is fair and an accurate report of the

    court proceedings protected under section 4 of the Act. Withregard to Item 5, he states thus: " This is a reaffirmation of an

    unimpeachable legal proposition in the most widely-prevalentlegal phraseology, to which no umbrage can be taken, for by

    this logic all petitions containing this phrase would be deemed

    contemptuous. Even the part of the quotation is from a leadingdecision of this Hon'ble Court in Maneka Gandhi's case."

    With regard to averments made in item 9, he justified it

    stating that "this again is an unresolved question of great legalsignificance and he cited as analogy of Mr. Fazlul Huq, then

    Chief Minister of Bengal and quoted a passage from a special

    Bench decision of the Calcutta High Court in R.C. Pollard v.Satya Gopal Majumdar [A.I.R. 1943 Cal. 594 (605)]. He

    added special emphasis to the words "the clear violation of itbrands a man as unfit for public office" and stated that it is a

    legal question of substantial importance relating to the

    violation of oath of office, contained in the Third Scheduledof the Constitution and it cannot be disposed of by a three

    judge Bench. It cannot be considered as personal imputation

    against the judge. With regard to imputation and prayer (a) initem 14, he says that the analogy he had taken from the

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    86/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    XS

    Calcutta High Court decision. It was natural corollary to thelegal proposition considered by a constitution Bench. with

    regard to prayer (d) in Item 14, he states that this is only aprayer for relief sought. The defence taken in relation to

    (xiv)(b) and (c) would equally be applicable and so he has

    reaffirmed them to be correct. The allegations, therefore, areneither "reckless" nor do they "disclose irresponsibility" (put

    within inverted comma by the petitioner himself) and is not"an abuse of the process of the Court."

    He reiterated that "several averments in the writ petition"being truthful, factual, and made without rancour or malice

    and for no personal, gain, should not be construed"scandalous" (inverted commas were put by the petitioner

    himself).

    Let us now consider other imputations, in the language of

    petitioner himself with regard to the "truthfully and carefully"stated facts. At page 5 in para 10, the petitioner has stated that

    "Justice Ahmadi's utmost reluctance to perform his

    fundamental duties and constitutional obligations wasapparent. when after failing to browbeat the petitioner, he

    stated that it would be taken up at the end of the cause list." inhis preliminary submissions he has stated that "this is a fair

    and accurate submission of the Court proceedings on matterwhich had already been "heard and finally decided"."(invertedcommas were put by the petitioner himself). He sought

    protection to it, as a fair comment, under Section 4 of the Act.

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    87/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    XR

    He further justified it stating that even the use of the would"browbeat" by the petitioner is a "fair criticism of judicial act"

    (inverted comma was put by the petitioner himself) to implythat proper hearing was not being granted to the petitioner

    who had approached the highest Court of the land to 'Protect

    and safeguard public property". he justified them as a"statement of truthful facts", for public good should not be

    construed as disrespect to the Hon'ble Court. After offeringjustification in his modified statement, he reiterates thus: "The

    petitioner discerned reluctance on the part of the presiding

    judge to allow the relief claimed, which was inpublic interest,

    and actuated by the desire to "Preserve and protect public

    property," without any personal malice." It would, thus,indicate that the petitioner imputed motives to Justice A.M.Ahmadi, chief justice India, in the discharge of his

    constitutional duty and that by not admitting the writ petition

    or dismissing the petition, the CJI was reluctant to perform his

    constitutional duty. He knew that the word "browbeat" is astrident imputation to the Court and, therefore, in his modified

    reluctance". Even in the modified statement, he attributedmotives to CJI in the performance of his constitutional dutywhile the Bench that dismissed the first writ petition consisted

    of three judges. By inference, he suggested the other brotherJudges to be mere non-entity. With regard to item 4 at page 6

    in para 15, he imputed to the CJI that "and without recording

    the reasons for dismissing the petition. So much for the

    vaunted adherence to the twin principles of transparency and

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    88/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    XX

    accountability." In his preliminary submissions, he has givenjustification for his attributed motives to CJI stating that the

    Solicitor General handed over some documents to the bench,without supplying the copy thereof to the bench, without

    supplying the copy thereof to the petitioner. When he had

    objected to it in his own language, he avers that "justiceAhmadi asked him to argue on the supposition that nothing

    had been given to the bench. In view of this, reference hasbeen made to the "twin principles of transparency and

    accountability which", according to the petitioner, "is a fair

    and accurate report of court proceedings, which is also for the"public good"." (inverted commas were put by the petitioner

    himself). In the modified statement he stated thus: "Thatjustice Ahmadi ultimately dismissed the petition, observing

    that the Government of India was capable to realise the duesfrom Shri Rao (which it had no to done in two years) andwithout recording the reasons for dismissing the petition, for

    which lapse it has often berated High Courts, in pursuance ofthe twin principles of transparency and accountability". It

    would, thus be seen that as regards this imputation, thepetitioner gives justification that there was omission to record

    reasons for dismissal of the writ petition; he imputed to CJI

    that the CJI facilitated Sri Narasimha Rao to avoid payment ofpublic dues. The act of the Court was not transparent.

    According to the petitioner, it is a lapse on the part of the

    Court for which the Court conduct, by implication, was not

    transparent and the Court must be accountable.

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    89/171

    JANHIT COLLEGE OF LAW

    XQ

    Item 6 at page 7 in paragraph 18(c) reads thus: "For causingfabrication of courts proceedings of 7th August, 1995, and not

    mentioning the fact of appearance of the solicitor General,would justice Ahmadi not be liable to prosecution under the

    relevant provisions of the Indianpenal codein consonance

    with the time-honoured maxim, `Be you ever so high, the lawis above you"?" (inverted commas were put by the petitioner

    himself). In his preliminary submissions he stated that

    "Although somewhat unhappily worded, it is one of thesubstantial questions of law, which needed to be determined

    by a constitution Bench of the apex court". According to him,above maxim is one to which this court has repeatedly stated

    to have avowed allegiance. In his modified version, he statedthus: "For inaccurate recording of the court proceedings of 7August, 1995, and not mentioning even the fact of appearance

    of the solicitor General for the respondent, what responsibility

    would ensue on the presiding judge, who dictated them?" It

    would, therefore, in the language of the petitioner, be"discernible" difference of the imputation as originally made

    in the writ petition and reiterated in his preliminarysubmissions and its impact was understood by the petitioner.Therefore, he made the amended version imputing

    responsibility to justice Ahmadi personally for the so calledinaccurate recording of the Court proceedings and stated that

    the CJI should be prosecuted for the record said to be falsely

    recorded by CJI after fabrication and it is a fraud and CJI is

    liable for prosecution for fraud etc. Item 7 at page 6 in

  • 7/24/2019 K- 710 Professional Ethics by Mr. Lokendra Singh

    90/171

    JANHIT