Perturbed over an Advocate’s act of keeping cheques as security owned by client with him & not releasing it despite the latter’s request, the Nagpur bench of Bombay HC has asked the Bar Council of India (BCI) to probe his alleged misconduct as per Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961.

A division bench comprising Justice Vinay Deshpande & Justice Amir Borkar said that “The BCI should probe whether the lawyer has committed misconduct by keeping post-dated cheques with him which was part of the settlement between the petitioners & the respondent. According to the respondent, the settlement could not fructify due to his counsel’s refusal to hand over the cheques to him".

Clarifying that their observations were prima facie in nature, the Judges directed BCI to complete the investigations in one year. “We have restrained ourselves from making detailed observations on the merits of the allegations made against the lawyer. The BCI shall hold disciplinary proceedings uninfluenced by any observations made above.”

The High Court was hearing a petition by Pankal Agrawal & others for quashing of FIR lodge by the Sitabuldi Police Station under Sections 420, 406, 409 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999. It was registered on a complaint filed by respondent Ashok Agrawal.

The petitioners moved High Court contending that their dispute was resolved amicably, & proceedings initiated against them should be quashed.

When the case came up for the hearing on Feb 23, the respondent took a u-turn saying he had not received the balance amount as agreed in ‘Deed of Settlement’. He pointed out that the post-dated cheques referred in the deed were handed over to his lawyer. But in spite of several requests, he refused to hand over the cheques, which were part of the settlement.

The Advocate denied his client’s charges, pointing out that the latter never demanded the cheques.

“While dealing with money or any other articles or documents entrusted with the lawyer, he is expected to keep in mind the high standards of the profession & its value practised for centuries. Their professional obligation must be distinguished from business commitments. They owe a social obligation to the society while discharging professional services to the litigant,” the Court said, asking them to fix the hearing of the application for compliance of their directives on April 24, 2023.

Disposing of the plea, they said the Lawyer should not commit any act by which a litigant could be deprived of his statutory & constitutional rights on account of the sublime position conferred upon him under the judicial system.

The bench said, “The expression of misconduct means wrongful gain & not mere error of judgment. It may be synonymous with improbable behaviour or mismanagement. It is to be construed & understood concerning the subject matter & context wherein the terms occur, taking into consideration the scope & object of the Advocates Act. One of the main objectives behind Section 35 is to prevent the exploitation of clients at the receiving end of the lawyer’s services & maintain the legal profession’s integrity".

(Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the LatestLaws staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)

Source Link

Picture Source : https://www.alisonslawavenues.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/advocate-robes.jpg