Back
S. M. SUBRAMANIAM, C. KUMARAPPAN
C. B. Suryanaraynan – Appellant
Versus
Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The law contemplates the statutory power conferred on the Authorities must be exercised in the manner as contemplated under the Act and the Rules itself.
2. In the present case, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry entertained complaint and after forming prima facie opinion, referred the matter under Section 35(1) of the Advocates Act, 1961, to the Disciplinary Committee for conducting an enquiry.
3. The Disciplinary Committee was in the process of conducting enquiry. During the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings, respondents 2 and 3 filed discharge application, which was entertained and the Disciplinary Committee heard the discharge application and allowed the same by discharging the respondents 2 and 3 from the disciplinary proceedings.
4. Part VII disciplinary proceedings and review Chapter-I contemplates the complaint against the Advocates and the procedures to be followed by the Disciplinary Committees of the State Bar Council and the Bar Council of India. The Rules are framed under Section 49(1)(f) of the Advocates Act, 1961.
5. Rule 11 (3) of the Bar Council of India Rules stipulates that “no disciplinary enquiry shall be dropped solely by reason of its h
The Disciplinary Committee must follow the procedures set forth in the Advocates Act and Bar Council Rules, and cannot entertain discharge applications that undermine the inquiry process.
The Bar Council's authority to refer complaints for inquiry under Section 35 of the Advocates Act is affirmed, emphasizing the need for proper inquiry into allegations of misconduct.
The necessity to exhaust statutory appeal remedies under the Advocates Act before seeking judicial review is a fundamental principle in legal proceedings concerning disciplinary actions.
The disciplinary committee's action timeline can be extended to exclude periods during which it is judicially prohibited from considering a complaint.
The Bar Council must form a 'reason to believe' before referring a case for disciplinary action to ensure valid complaints against advocates.
Professional misconduct by Advocate – Disposal of a complaint received by State Bar Council under Section 35 within a period of one year from date of receipt of such complaint is mandatory.
The court affirmed the constitutionality of Section 9 of the Advocates Act, 1961, and upheld the existing framework for the Disciplinary Committee's composition.
The court considered the futility of continuing disciplinary proceedings against an advocate due to age and inactive practice, leading to the quashing of the notice of hearing.
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
