bar council of india
MANU/SC/1059/2002
Equivalent Citation: AIR2003SC308, 2003(1)ALLMR(SC)777, 2003 1 AWC(Supp)422SC, 2003(1)CGLJ117, 95(2003)CLT273(SC), 101(2002)DLT164(SC), JT2002(9)SC619, (2003)1MLJ184(SC), (2003)1SCC384, 2003(1)UJ331, 2003(2)WLN706
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided On: 29.11.2002
Appellants: Vikas Deshpande
Vs.
Respondent: Bar Council of India and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
V.N. Khare and Ashok Bhan, JJ.
Counsels:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Party in perso
For Respondents/Defendant: V.B. Joshi, Adv. for Respondent No. 2
Subject: Civil
Catch Words
Mentioned IN
Acts/Rules/Orders:
Advocates Act, 1961 - Section 35, Advocates Act, 1961 - Section 35(3), Advocates Act, 1961 - Section 35B, Advocates Act, 1961 - Section 38
Disposition:
Appeal dismissed
Case Note:
Advocates Act, 1961 - Section 35 -- Professional misconduct--Complainants requesting Court of Session for appointment of amicus curiae to defend them in murder trial--But complainants convicted and sentenced to death--Appellant advocate meeting them in jail and getting vakalatnama signed by them to prefer appeal to High Court without charging any fee--Again meeting them and getting their signatures on blank papers--Appellant selling land of complainants on basis of alleged power-of-attorney executed by complainants in his favour--And appropriating sale proceeds as his fee--Bar Council of India directing State Bar Council for removal of his name from roll of Bar Council--Whether justified?--Held, “yes”--Appellant committed grave professional misconduct--No merit in appeal.
The appellant has failed to lead any evidence to displace the testimony of Vidhyadhar, complainant to the effect that the appellant had solicited a brief for himself from them and they had not executed any power-of-attorney in his favour for the purpose of the sale of their land. He had obtained signatures and thumb impressions of the complainants on some documents. Without informing and to the knowledge of
Equivalent Citation: AIR2003SC308, 2003(1)ALLMR(SC)777, 2003 1 AWC(Supp)422SC, 2003(1)CGLJ117, 95(2003)CLT273(SC), 101(2002)DLT164(SC), JT2002(9)SC619, (2003)1MLJ184(SC), (2003)1SCC384, 2003(1)UJ331, 2003(2)WLN706
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided On: 29.11.2002
Appellants: Vikas Deshpande
Vs.
Respondent: Bar Council of India and Ors.
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
V.N. Khare and Ashok Bhan, JJ.
Counsels:
For Appellant/Petitioner/Plaintiff: Party in perso
For Respondents/Defendant: V.B. Joshi, Adv. for Respondent No. 2
Subject: Civil
Catch Words
Mentioned IN
Acts/Rules/Orders:
Advocates Act, 1961 - Section 35, Advocates Act, 1961 - Section 35(3), Advocates Act, 1961 - Section 35B, Advocates Act, 1961 - Section 38
Disposition:
Appeal dismissed
Case Note:
Advocates Act, 1961 - Section 35 -- Professional misconduct--Complainants requesting Court of Session for appointment of amicus curiae to defend them in murder trial--But complainants convicted and sentenced to death--Appellant advocate meeting them in jail and getting vakalatnama signed by them to prefer appeal to High Court without charging any fee--Again meeting them and getting their signatures on blank papers--Appellant selling land of complainants on basis of alleged power-of-attorney executed by complainants in his favour--And appropriating sale proceeds as his fee--Bar Council of India directing State Bar Council for removal of his name from roll of Bar Council--Whether justified?--Held, “yes”--Appellant committed grave professional misconduct--No merit in appeal.
The appellant has failed to lead any evidence to displace the testimony of Vidhyadhar, complainant to the effect that the appellant had solicited a brief for himself from them and they had not executed any power-of-attorney in his favour for the purpose of the sale of their land. He had obtained signatures and thumb impressions of the complainants on some documents. Without informing and to the knowledge of