Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Mohit Kumar Shah, J.
CWJC No. 10426 of 2024
(12.11.2024)
Amrendra Kumar Singh ... Petitioner
vs.
Bihar State Bar Council through the Secretary & Anr. ... Respondents
Uniform Rules at Bihar State Bar Council – Rules 17, 17A, 25(xii)(r) to (s), 32 and 32B – Bihar State Bar Council seizing the financial powers of Secretary of the District Bar Association, Chapra (Petitioner herein) with a second show cause notice to him to explain his position regarding complaint against him for financial irregularities – While exercising the powers of judicial review, the High Court is not sitting in appeal, as an appellate court, over the actions of statutory authorities and what is to be seen is the error in the judicial/decision making process and not the validity of the decision itself – It has been settled by the Hon'ble Apex Court that a Court cannot go into the question of the aptness or sufficiency of the grounds upon which the subjective satisfaction of an authority is based and the Court has to only see as to whether there are sufficient materials or not – In the present case, there are sufficient reasons to reckon that financial irregularities and administrative lapses are prevailing in the District Bar Association, Chapra and thus the impugned order does not warrant any interference – However, seizing of financial powers is not by way of punishment, it is anciliary to the exercise of main power as also in the aid of substantive power itself would become meaningless – Hence, it cannot be said that Bihar State Bar Council has no power to suspend, in view of Rule 32B of the Uniform rules – This writ petition has no merit and stands dismissed. (Para 12)
Sanjay Kumar Modi Vs. State of Bihar, CWJC No. 1051 of 2013, dated 29.11.2013 – Relied.
Mohit Kumar Shah, J.—The present writ petition has been filed for quashing the letter dated 11.06.2024 (containing Resolution No. 83/2024 dated 08.06.2024), issued by the Bihar State Bar Council, Patna, whereby and whereunder the financial powers of the General Secretary of the District Bar Association, Chapra i.e. the petitioner herein has been seized and a second show cause has been directed to be issued to him to explain the position, keeping in view the complaint petition filed by 293 Members, including the Executive Members of the District Bar Association, Chapra, application of the Treasurer and report of the Three Member Committee and come forward with detailed explanation, regarding the issues raised therein, qua the petitioner as also appear before the General Body of the Bihar State Bar Council, Patna, with ledger and other proof in support of his explanation.
2. The brief facts of the case, according to the petitioner, are that the petitioner had contested the election of District Bar Association, Chapra, for the term 2024-26 and was elected as the General Secretary of the Bar Association, whereafter he took oath on 16.04.2024 and the first meeting of the Association was held on 30.04.2024. A general complaint is stated to have been made by the Members of the District Bar Association, Chapra, on 1.5.2024, before the Bihar State Bar Council, Patna, inter alia alleging therein regarding enhancement of the cost of vakalatnama, hajri form, bond paper, bail bond title page, complain title page, application form and file, leading to the Bihar State Bar Council constituting a Three Member Enquiry Committee. The said Three Member Committee had conducted an inspection on 09.05.2024 and submitted an inspection report on 11.05.2024.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in paragraph no. 9 of the inspection report dated 11.05.2024, the only allegation, which has been made, is regarding enhancement of charges in respect of hajri form disproportionately and discontinuance of the share of Advocates and Advocate clerks in the same, resulting in resentment in the Bar, apart from some allegations being made in the said report regarding functioning of the Committee during the period 2022 to 2024, for which the petitioner is not responsible, inasmuch as his financial power had been seized vide letter dated 19.07.2023.
4. It is further stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a show cause notice was issued by the Bihar State Bar Council, Patna on 13.5.2024, which has already been replied to by the petitioner. It is contended that even the Three Member Committee, in its report dated 11.05.2024, has suggested for conducting audit of the Association by a Chartered Accountant and on the basis of the same, the Bihar State Bar Council, Patna may consider taking further action, hence, it is submitted that there is no specific allegation of defalcation and misappropriation qua the petitioner herein, thus, the impugned order dated 11.6.2024 is fit to be set aside.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has next contended that the newly elected Committee of the District Bar Association, Chapra held a general body meeting on 30.04.2024, wherein budget was passed for the period 2024-26, showing expenses to the tune of Rs. 2,12,75,000/- and the income as Rs. 2,00,89,000/-. Thus, it is submitted that within a few days, no defalcation / misappropriation could have been resorted to by the petitioner and moreover, neither any specific allegation has been levelled against the petitioner in the complaint dated 01.05.2024 nor any specific finding of defalcation and misappropriation has been arrived at in the said enquiry report dated 11.5.2024 qua the petitioner, hence, there is no occasion to issue a second show cause notice, thus the order dated 11.6.2024, passed by the Bihar State Bar Council, Patna, is fit to be quashed.
6. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the Bihar State Bar Council, Patna, has submitted,
The Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India cannot entertain appeals without prior punishment being imposed by the State Bar Council, rendering subsequent orders non-est.
The abrupt increase of the nomination fee for elections to Rs.1,25,000 without following due legal process violates democratic principles and is deemed arbitrary and unconstitutional.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of correctly interpreting the specific provisions of the Rules, 2006 in the context of affiliation, and ensuring that the denial of ....
A writ under Article 226 is maintainable against the BCCI, and internal disputes within the BCA should be addressed by the BCCI Ombudsman.
The Bar Council can initiate disciplinary action based on a reasonable belief of wrongdoing or a formal complaint without infringing on an advocate's rights until a final order is made.
Cancellation of membership from a Bar Association must be ratified by the General Body and comply with model byelaws; any failure to adhere renders the cancellation invalid.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
