IMPORTANT POINT
The conduct involving conviction for an offence involving moral turpitude which would disqualify a person from being enrolled as an advocate has to be considered a serious mis-conduct when found to have been committed by a person who is enrolled as an advocate and it would call for the imposition of the punishment of removal of the name of the advocate from the roll of advocates.

JUDGMENT

S.C. Agrawal, J.-Ishwar Prasad Arya, respondent No. 1, was registered as an advocate with the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh and was practising at Badaun. An incident took place on May 18, 1971 during lunch interval at about 1.55 p.m. in which respondent No. 1 assaulted his opponent Radhey Shyam in the court room of Munsif/Magistrate, Bisauli at Badaun with a knife. A pistol shot is also said to have been fired by him at time of incident. After investigation he was prosecuted for offences under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act. The 1st Temporary Civil and Sessions Judge, by his judgment dated July 3, 1972, convicted him of the said offence and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years for the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. and for a period of nine months for offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act. The conviction and sentence for the offence under Section 307 I.P.C. were maintained by the High Court by its judgment dated September 10, 1975 in Criminal Appeal No. 1873 of 1972 but he was given the benefit of doubt regarding offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act and the conviction and sentence for the said offence were set aside. Before he could be arrested to undergo the punishment of rigorous imprisonment for three years for offence under Section 307 I.P.C., a copy of letter No. Pr.VI/Chh.Pa XXIII-2016-75-76 dated April 28, 1976 purporting to have been sent by Shri L.R. Singh, Deputy Secretary, Ministry of Home, U.P., Lucknow, addressed to the District Magistrate, Badaun bearing endorsement No. 1513 (II)-75-76 was received in the Court of the IIIrd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Badaun, who was responsible for executing the order of the Court of the 1st Temporary Civil & Sessions Judge on its abolition. In the said letter it was stated that the Governor has been pleased to suspend the conviction of Ishwar Prasad Arya under Article 161 of the Constitution with immediate effect and until further orders he should remain free. After receiving the copy of the said letter dated April 28, 1976 the IIIrd Additional District & Sessions Judge, on April 30, 1976, stayed the proceedings in the case and despite repeated inquiries by the court from the State Government about the suspension of the sentence the execution of the sentence awarded to respondent remained suspended till September 27, 1977, when on receipt of a crash radiogram message from the Home Ministry, Lucknow, it was found that the letter dated April 28, 1976 was fraudulent and thereupon a warrant for the arrest of respondent No. 1 was issued by the court on September 28, 1977 and he was arrested the same day and was sent to Badauni Jail to undergo the imprisonment. On December 9, 1977 Shri G.S. Sharma, IIIrd Additional District & Sessions Judge, Badaun, sent a complaint containing these facts to the Chairman, Bar Council of U.P., for taking action against respondent No. 1 under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). On the basis of the said complaint disciplinary proceedings (D.C. Case No. 70 of 1981) were initiated against respondent No. 1 by the Bar Council of U.P. By order dated January 30, 1982 the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of U.P. found respondent No. 1 guilty of gross professional mis-conduct by taking the benefit himself of a forged and fabricated document which had been prepared at his behest. The Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of U.P. directed that respondent No. 1 be debarred from practising as an advocate for a period of two years from the date of the service of the order. Respondent No. 1 filed an appeal (D.C. Appeal No. 4 of 1982) in the Bar Council of India against the order dated January 30, 1982 passed by the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of U.P. The said appeal was allowed by the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India by order dated June 8, 1984 and the order of the Disciplinary Committee of th