M. HIDAYATULLAH, G. K. MITTER, A. N. RAY
O. N. Mohindroo: Supreme Court Bar Association – Appellant
Versus
District Judge, Delhi – Respondent
Judgment
HIDAYATULLAH, C.J.I. :- The appellant in these two appeals is an advocate of this Court, who on complaint by the District Judge, Delhi, 29 February, 1964, to the Bar Council of the State of Delhi, was held guilty of professional misconduct and suspended from practice for a year by the disciplinary committee of the said Bar Council. He appealed to the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India under Sec. 37 of the Advocates Act. The appeal was dismissed. His appeal to this Court under Sec. 38 of the Act was dismissed summarily at the preliminary hearing. The charge against him was that while inspecting a judicial record in the company of Mr. Kuldip Singh Advocate, he tore out 2 pieces of paper from an Exhibit (C-I). The pieces were thrown by him on the ground. The clerk-in-charge reported the incident to the District Judge and the complaint followed.
2. The suit, record of which was being inspected, arose in the following circumstances. On February 6, 1963 Mr. Anant Ram Whig, an advocate, sent a notice on behalf of one Sarin to a certain Ramlal Hans and his wife claiming a sum of Rs. 4370/- as reward for the success of their daughter at an examination including tuitio
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.