Download case analysis ethics and more Papers Bioethics in PDF only on Docsity! CASE 10 IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Civil Appeal No. 720 NCM of 1983 TITLE OF THE CASE: Pandurang Dattatraya Khandekar ... Plaintiff Versus Bar Council Of Maharashtra ... Respondent CITATION: 1984 1 SCR 41 BENCH: The Hon’ble Mr. A.P. Sen, J. COUNSELS: For the Appellant : Mr. V.J Francis For the Respondent : Mr. V.N. Ganpule and V.D. Khanna DATE OF JUDGMENT: 20th day of October, 1983 1. FACTS OF THE CASE 1.1 FACTUAL MATRIX: Group of 12 advocates practising in the two courts of Sub-Divisional Magistrates in the Collectorate of Poona filed a complaint against two people, (Appellant) and another under Sec. 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961 (hereafter “Act”) alleging various acts of professional misconduct. The proceedings stood transferred to the Bar Council of India under Sec. 36B of the Act. The Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India by its order dated April 23, 1976 held both the appellant and another guilty of professional misconduct and directed that the appellant be suspended for a period of four months and Agavane for a period of two months there from. These disciplinary proceedings were appealed from as per Sec. 38 of the Act in the instant case. 2. ISSUES 1. Whether there was any evidence upon which the Disciplinary Committee could reasonably find that they have been guilty of 'professional misconduct, within the meaning of Sec. 35(1) of the Act? 2. Whether the finding of the Disciplinary Committee as to professional misconduct on the part of the appellant can be legally sustained? 3. RULES • Section 35, Advocates Act, 1961 • Section 38, Advocates Act, 1961 4. ANALYSIS 4.1 Stare Decisis: The test of what constitutes “grossly improper conduct in the discharge of professional duties” has been laid down in many cases with one being the case of In re A Solicitor Ex pane the Law Society, [(1912) 1 KB 302]. The test to be applied in all such cases is whether the proved misconduct of the advocate is such that he must be regarded as unworthy to remain a member of the honourable profession to which he has been admitted, and unfit to be entrusted with the responsible duties that an advocate is called upon to perform as laid down in the landmark judgment of the apex court in Pleader v. The Judges of the High Court of Madras [AIR (1930) PC 144]. 4.2 - ISSUE 1 Ratio Decidendi The test of what constitutes “grossly improper conduct in the discharge of professional duties” has been laid down in many cases with one being the case of In re A Solicitor Ex pane the Law Society, [(1912) 1 KB 302]. Similarly, in the profession of law an act to amount to professional conduct not
