SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2004 Supreme(SC) 562

BRIJESH KUMAR, S. B. SINHA
Bar Council Of India – Appellant
Versus
High Court Of Kerala – Respondent


JUDGMENT

S.B. Sinha, J.-

INTRODUCTION :

Constitutionality of Rule 11 of the Rules framed by the High Court of Kerala forbidding a lawyer from appearing, acting or pleading in any court till he got himself purged of the Contempt by an order of the appropriate court is in question in this writ petition.

BACKGROUND FACT :

2. The Bar Council of India is a statutory body constituted under the Advocates Act, 1961 ("the Act"). In terms of Section 34(1) of the Act, the High Court of Kerala framed rules; Rule 11 whereof reads as under :

"No advocate who has been found guilty of contempt of court shall be permitted to appear, act or plead in any court unless he has purged himself of the contempt."

3. Contending that the said provision is violative of Articles 14 and 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India as also Section 34(1) of the Advocates Act on the ground that it seriously impinges upon and usurps the powers of adjudication and punishment conferred on the Bar Councils under the Act as also the principles of natural justice as application thereof is automatic, this writ petition has been filed by the Petitioner.

4. It is not in dispute that the validity of the said rule came up for consideration







































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top