IMPORTANT POINT
The court quashed disciplinary proceedings against a lawyer, finding the complaint to be frivolous and lacking merit, with no professional relationship between the complainant and the petitioner.

JUDGMENT :

Ananda Sen, J.

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. Learned counsel for the Bar Council prays for some time.

3. The prayer for adjournment made by the learned counsel for the Bar Council is rejected, mainly on the ground that the Bar Council has initiated an disciplinary enquiry in respect of a complaint made by respondent No. 3 against the petitioner, who is a practicing lawyer. The role of the Bar Council is limited. They should act as a neutral body and they cannot take side of any of the parties. Thus, they need not be heard on the merit of the case. The Bar council can only make submission if their jurisdiction is challenged.

4. By filing this petition, the petitioner, who is a practicing lawyer at Palamau at Daltonganj, has challenged the initiation and continuation of disciplinary enquiry being D.C. Enquiry No. 3/2023, initiated against the petitioner by Jharkhand State Bar Council vide notice dated 26.8.2023.

5. Counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly the petitioner is a lawyer and he was conducting matrimonial cases and other cases representing the wife of respondent No. 3 against the respondent No. 3. Only to wreak vengeance and to preempt the petitioner from defending the wife of respondent No. 3, against the respondent No. 3, in several court proceedings, this frivolous complaint has been filed. He submits that the Bar Council on frivolous allegation and the allegation, which is not at all connected with the professional conduct of the petitioner, has entertained the same and has initiated a Disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner. He lastly submits that from the allegation levelled, even if on the face value the same is taken to be true, anyone who would be aggrieved, is the wife of the respondent No. 3 i.e. the client of this petitioner, but surprisingly, she has not made any complaint against the lawyer. Thus, he prays that this petition be allowed.

6. Mr. Rajesh Kumar, learned counsel for the complainant, submits that from the complaint itself, which has been filed as per Chapter-II, Part VI, Rule-V of the Bar Council Rules and as per the complaint, there is serious misconduct committed by the petitioner, which requires initiation of a Disciplinary Proceeding. It is his contention that at the very initial stage, the proceeding cannot be strangulated rather the petitioner should appear before the Disciplinary Committee and make submissions on his behalf and only after if any adverse order is passed, this Court gets jurisdiction to entertain any application under Article 226 of the Constitution. It is his contention that this application, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the notice and initiation of the Disciplinary Enquiry is premature.

7. The learned Chairman, Jharkhand State Bar Council submits that they have jurisdiction to entertain the complaint.

8. After hearing the parties, I am not entering into the question of jurisdiction of the Bar Council. Even for the sake of arguments, if it is held that the Jharkhand State Bar Council has jurisdiction to entertain the complaint, then also on the face of it, I find that there is merit for entertaining and allowing the writ petition.

9. Admittedly, the petitioner is an Advocate. Admittedly, a long standing matrimonial dispute is going on between respondent No. 3 and his wife-Priti Devi. Two cases of matrimonial disputes are pending before the trial courts; a divorce case and a proceeding under Section 125 Cr.P.C. Admittedly, the petitioner is the lawyer representing Priti Devi before the Civil Courts. On this background, the present complaint has been lodged by respondent No. 3 before the Jharkhand State Bar Council praying therein to initiate a disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner on the ground that he has professionally misconducted himself.

10. The complaint has been brought on record which is at Annexure-1 to this writ petition. In the said complaint, the complainant has admitted that after his