1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 10^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT

WRIT PETITION NO.16518 OF 2021(GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

SRI.M.S. SRINIVASA,

AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,

S/O DR. M. V. SHANKARANARAYANA IYER,

NO.39/1, PINAKI, 2^ND FLOOR,

ABOVE SBI, SANNIDHI ROAD,

N R COLONY, BASAVANAGUDI,

BENGALURU-560 004.

...PETITIONER

(BY SRI. SOURABH R K, ADVOCATE)

AND:

1. UNION OF INDIA

REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,

DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,

MINISTRY OF FINANCE,

NORTH BLOCK,

NEW DELHI-110 001.

2. THE COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (APPEALS)

BMTC BUILDING,

ABOVE BMTC BUS STAND, DOMLUR,

BENGALURU-560 071.

& RESPONDENTS

(BY SMT. PRATIBHA R, CGC FOR R1;

SRI. JEEVAN J NEERALGI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLS 226 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO EXPUNGE THE

OBSERVATION IN PARAGRAPH 8 OF ORDER DTD.16.3.2021

IN ORDER IN APPEAL NO.206/2021 PASSED BY THE R-2

PRODUCED IN ANNEXURE-D TO THE EXTENT OF THE

FOLLOWING SENTENCE THE OBJECTIVE OF IMPOSING A

PENALTY OF RS.15000/- IN ONLY TO IMPRESS UPON THE

APPELLANT THAT THEY OUGHT TO BE MORE CAREFUL IN

FUTURE AND DO JUSTICE TO THEIR ROLE AND DUTIES

RATHER THAN TAKE SHELTER BEHIND TECHNICALITIES

AND ADVOCATES WHO THINK THEY CAN DEFEND THE

R

2

INDEFENSIBLE

BY

GIVING

THEIR

OWN

SKEWED

UNDERSTANDING

OF

THE

LAW

AND

MISGUIDING

APPELLANTS.

THIS

PETITION

COMING

ON

FOR

PRELIMINARY

HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:-

ORDER

Petitioner is an advocate by occupation; he had

appeared for the appellant in appeal vide A.No. 279/2019

CUS(B-Air); the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) vide

order dated 16.03.2021 at Annexure-D dismissed the

appeal; in the course of order, the Commissioner has made

certain observations at para 8 therein which read are as

under:

<8.

The objective of imposing a penalty of

Rs.15000/- is only to impress upon the

appellant that they ought to be more careful in

future and do justice to their role and duties

rather than take shelter behind technicalities

and advocates who think they can defend

the

indefensible

by

giving

their

own

skewed understanding of the law and

misguiding appellants.=

(highlighting is mine)

2.

The portion of the observations that are

highlighted would reflect on the professional conduct of the

petitioner, argues his counsel; learned Panel Counsel

appearing for the respondents opposes the writ petition

contending that the said observations are case specific and

3

therefore petitioner may not read too much in that; so

contending he seeks dismissal of the writ petition.

3. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties

and having perused the petition papers, this Court is

inclined to grant reprieve to the petitioner as under and for

the following reasons:

(a) The legal profession is of vital importance not

only to the administration of justice but also for the rule of

law & good governance; lawyers are to the civil society

what soldiers are to the frontiers of a nation; lawyers

profession

is

the

only

profession

constitutionally

recognized; Marcus Tullius Cicero centuries ago called this

profession as the 8noble profession9; lawyers lend voice to

the voiceless; they stand unfazed during social tumult; our

Freedom Struggle was led by lawyers; our Constitution is

the child of great legal brains; of course, others too have

contributed a lot, cannot be denied; the great principles of

governance and constitutional doctrines like the doctrine

of Basic Structure are the contribution of tall lawyers; it is

they who draw the chariot of law & justice; words fall short

to extol the greatness of this profession.

4

(b) It is relevant to quote what the great sages of

law have said about advocacy & advocates: 8Their vocation

is to fight for truth. The light of truth is their weapon;

goodwill is their