IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE RAJENDRA KUMAR (VERMA)
ON THE 22nd OF NOVEMBER, 2022
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 42393 of 2022
BETWEEN:-
DHARMENDRA SINGH PARIHAR S/O SHREE
PREM SINGH PARIHAR, AGED ABOUT 22
YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURE CHAPEDA
SATGANV TEHSIL AND DISTRICT SHAJAPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(SHRI GOURAV SHRIVASTAVA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
PETITIONER .
AND
1.
NARAYAN PRASAD PANDEY S/O LATE SHREE
MADANLAL PANDEY, AGED ABOUT 73 YEARS,
OCCUPATION: ADVOCATE 91 YOGESH BHAWAN
NAI SADAK SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
2.
DISTRICT BAR ASSOCIATION S/O DISTRICT
BAR
ASSOCIATION SHAJAPUR,
DISTRICT
SHAJAPUR (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(SHRI PRANAY JOSHI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE
RESPONDENT NO.1 AND NONE FOR RESPONDENT NO.2
THOUGH DULY SERVED.
This PETITION coming on for ADMISSION this day, but with
the consent of parties, heard finally and the court passed the
following:
This petition has been filed under Section 407 of Cr.P.C. for
transfer of the complaint case registered as SCNIA No.133/2021
pending before the Court of JMFC, Shajapur (M.P.) to any other nearby
1
situated Court.
Facts of the case are that non-applicant/respondent has filed a
complaint under Section 138 of N.I. Act alleging that the cheques
bearing numbers 610702 and 610703 of Rs.2.,00,000/- each were
issued by the applicant in lieu of a financial liability against the non-
applicant. The cheques were presented for encashment before the bank,
but were dishonored due to insufficiency of funds in the accounts of the
applicant. The said complaint was registered as SCNIA No.133/2021
pending before the JMFC, Shajapur. The respondent is a practicing
advocate at Shajapur and hence, in view of the resolution of District
Bar Association Shajapur dated 27.05.20022 that no advocate enrolled
in their association can be engaged in any case against the advocates
and, hence, the petitioner and his counsels have also moved an
application for engaging another counsel. On 25.06.2022, the learned
trial Court has rejected applications of the applicant and framed the
charges against the petitioner under Section 138 of N.I. Act. In view of
the resolution dated 27.05.2022 and ignoring the facts the learned
Court has passed the order dated 25.06.2022 which affects the
fundamental rights of the petitioner and hence, the present petition has
been filed for transfer of the case to nearby Court.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the resolution
passed by District Bar Association, Shajapur as well as the order of
learned trial Court dated 25.06.2022 are in violation of general rule of
2
law 'right to defend' which is available to the applicant/accused as
guaranteed under Article 20 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The
prayer of the petitioner was very limited to adjourn the case only for a
short period and in view of the resolution, the advocates appearing on
behalf of the petitioner have withdrawn their vakalatnama. The learned
trial Court has erred in passing the order while there were no advocate
on behalf of the petitioner and the petitioner was under apprehension
that as the respondent is also an advocate and due to the resolution of
Bar, no advocate will appear in his case. It is further submitted that in
case the trial is commence in absence of the Advocate for the petitioner,
the petitioner will suffer irreparable losses and unlawful hardships.
Hence, prays for transfer of the case to the adjacent place/Court.
Learned counsel for the respondent no.1, on the other hand, has
opposed the prayer by submitting that the notice issued by the District
Bar Association, Shajapur has already been withdrawn and there is no
hardship in hearing the matter at Shajapur and prays for dismissal of the
petition.
I have heard the counsel for the parties and perused the record.
It is evident from the record that District Bar Association,
Shajapur has given notice (Annexure A/4) to the advocates appearing on
behalf of the petitioner on 27.05.2022 and the advocates appearing on
behalf of the petitioners have prays for withdrawal of their vakalatnama
by filing an application (Annexure A/3). It is also evident that District
3
Bar Association, Shajapur has passed the resolution that no member of
the District Bar Association will appear in any case which is filed
against any Member of District Bar Association, Shajapur. Such
resolution is illegal. It is fundamental right enshrined by the
Constitution of India to every citizen to avail legal assistance from
any Advocate/Lawyer, Firm or authorized person. Such resolution
is not only unconstitutional but also against the ethics of
professional advocacy as well as against the concept of Articles 14,
20, 21 and 22(1) of Constitution of India. Legal profession is one of
the honourable profession. Every litigant should be at liberty to find
out for himself as to which lawyer will render him the best services.
Such resolution is also against the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.