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

2001 Supreme(AP) 1348

V.V.S.RAO, BILAL NAZKI, S.B.SINHA
B. Rajeswar Reddy – Appellant
Versus
K. Narasimhachari – Respondent


S. B. SINHA, C. J.

( 1 ) QUESTION :whether calling for applications by the Metropolitan Sessions Judge or the Additional Metropolitan Sessions Judge for appointment in the post of Public Prosecutor/additional Public Prosecutor would amount to soliciting the brief within the meaning of Rule 36 of the Bar Council of India Rules (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules") framed by the Bar Council of India and thereby would amount to professional misconduct or not is the question involved in these appeals.

( 2 ) FACTS : pursuant to or in furtherance of the Government Memo N. 34548/courts, A. 2/2000-1, dated 30-9-2000, the Collector and District Magistrate, Hydrabad district sent a letter dated 30-10-2000 to the Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Hyderabad requesting him to send panels along with bio-data particulars for appointment to the posts of Public Prosecutor and Additional Public Prosecutors. In turn, the Metropolitan Sessions Judge by letter dated 15-12-2000, requested the II Additional Metropolitan Magistrate-cum-Chief Metropolitan Magistrate to suggest panels whereafter the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate put up a notice in the notice board calling for applications from the advocates w


































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