Expressing deep concern over the act of impropriety by a practicing lawyer who allegedly took money from a client on the pretext of offering bribe to a judge, the Orissa High Court ordered for a thorough inquiry by the State Bar Council saying that “such conduct is unbecoming of an advocate”.
“The advocate enjoys the implicit faith of the court, each and every advocate practicing in a particular court not only as an officer of that court but also acts as an ambassador of the law to the society at large. Therefore, such conduct is unbecoming of an advocate:, a Single Bench Judge Justice Sibo Sankar Mishra observed while refusing to quash the FIR lodged against the accused lawyer.
This Court is not inclined to do so (quash the FIR) as the allegations are not only at a nascent stage of investigation but also as quite serious in nature as the name of a former Judge of this Court has been soiled, Justice Mishra ruled in an order pronounced recently.
The accused lawyer faced legal proceedings under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 after the client, wife of a man booked under Odisha Protection of Interests of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act lodged a complaint against him.
The accused lawyer had taken Rs 16 lakh, a gold chain, and a gold bracelet for the daughter’s marriage of the then judge of the high court on the plea that the cash and kind will be bribed to a judge of the high court to secure bail of her husband.
On requisitioning the return of their case file, original land documents and money by the client, the lawyer denied the same and threatened them that he will lodge false case against them and also threatened them that he would destroy their Court cases as he has good links with many Judges of the High Court and lower Courts.
“The entirety of the truth of the matter can only be unearthed during the course of a detailed investigation, all that can be said that at this stage is that given the grave allegations of impropriety which touch upon the sanguineness of the judicial edifice, the present case needs a thorough and impartial investigation to get to the bottom of the matter”, Justice Mishra stated in the order.
“A strong action needs to be taken in order to maintain the faith of the litigant and the society at large. Provisions under Chapter-V of the Advocates Act, 1961 and the Bar Council of India Rules, 1975 provide for a mechanism of dealing with cases of professional misconduct on the part of advocates”, the order noted.
”The Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council is directed to examine whether a case of professional ‘misconduct’ is made out or not. This Court, therefore, directs the Bar Council of Orissa to hold an inquiry into the allegations. The Bar Council of Orissa shall hold Disciplinary Proceedings uninfluenced by any observations made above and by affording ample opportunity to all concerned to participate in the proceedings,” the judgment concluded.