Karnataka State Bar Council
Ksbc Logo logo court Indian Flag

Index Page


35. Punishment of advocates for misconduct
    (1) Where on receipt of a complaint or otherwise a State Bar Council has reason to believe that any advocate on roll has been guilty of professional or other misconduct, it shall refer the case for disposal to its disciplinary committee.

    2[(1A) The State Bar Council may, either of its own motion or on application made to it by any person interested, withdraw a proceeding pending before its disciplinary committee and direct the inquiry to be made by any other disciplinary committee of that State Bar Council.]

    (2) The disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council shall fix a date for the hearing of the case and shall cause a notice thereof to be given to the advocate concerned and to the Advocate-General of the State.

    (3) The disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council after giving the advocate concerned and the Advocate-General an opportunity of being heard, may make any of the following orders, namely:

      (a) dismiss the complaint or, where the proceedings were initiated at the instance of the State Bar Council, direct that the proceedings be filed;

      (b) reprimand the advocate;

      (c) suspend the advocate from practice for such period as it may deem fit; (d) remove the name of the advocate from the State roll of advocates.

    (4) Where an advocate is suspended from practice under clause (c) of sub-section (3) he shall, during the period of suspension, be debarred from practising in any court or before any authority or person in India.

    (5) Where any notice is issued to the Advocate-General under sub-section (2), the Advocate-General may appear before the disciplinary committee of the State Bar Council either in person or through any advocate appearing on his behalf.

    l[Explanation : In this section, l[section 37 and section 38] the expressions" Advocate-General" and" Advocate-General of the State" shall, in relation to the Union Territory of Delhi, mean the Additional Solicitor General of India.


    After the passing of the Advocates Act, the Bar Councils have been given the jurisdiction to take disciplinary proceedings against the advocates if they are found to be remiss in the performance of their duties in a manner which is worthy of their profession. No court is invested with any jurisdiction to control the actions of an advocate who is cited as a witness and who wants to represent an accused person in a criminal trial-(1973) 1 Ch. LR (Cri) 347 (punj).

    Advocates have no right to go on strike. They have obligation to ensure smooth functioning of the Court. They cannot disrupt court proceedings and put interest of their client in jeopardy.-Ex. Capt. Harish Uppal v. UOI, AIR 2003 SC 739.

    Cross examination of witness by the advocate not completed on a particular day. Matter adjoumed by trial court for a month. Failure of advocate in not making application for cross-examination on next working day amounts to failure in their duties and not abuse of process of court or misconduct.-2002 Cri.L.J. 690 (Sikkim).

    Relationship between an advocate and his client is of trust and therefore sacred. Acts of professional misconduct and the frequency with which such acts are coming to light distressed the court. Preservation of the mutual trust between the advocate and the client is a must otherwise the prevalent judicial system in the country would collapse and fail. Such acts do not only affect the lawyers found guilty of such acts but erode the confidence of the general public in the prevalent judicial system. It is more so, because today hundred percent recruitment to the Bench is from the Bar starting from the subordinate judiciary to the higher judiciary. You cannot find honest and hard working Judges unless you find honest and hard working lawyers in their chambers. Time has come when the society in general, respective Bar Council of the States and the Judges should take note of the warning bells and take remedial steps and nip the evil or the curse, in the bud.- Vikas Deshpande v. Bar Council of India AIR 2003 SC 308.

    Conduct of Advocate in filing review petition containing baseless allegations and insinuation reflecting on conduct of judges does not credit to noble profession to which he belongs. Bar Council of India directed to take appropriate action against such advocate.-Vikas Deshpande v. Bar Council of India (2003) 7 Scale 212; (2003) 6 Supreme 414 (SC).

    Citing overruled case by advocates in a case, order holding 'investigation as unauthorised' based on case which was overruled by Supreme Court. Matter remitted. It was held that falling standard of professional conductviz. citing overruled judgments is deprecated.-State of Orissa v. Nalinikanta Muduli AIR 2004 SC 4272.

    Advocate engaging himself actively in business of petroleum products. License to practice suspended by Bar Council for a period of 5 years. Appellant remained out of practice for a period of more than 5 years. Entering into Partnership with his younger brother that appellant would remain a sleeping partner and younger brother will actively look after business. Appellant allowed liberty to approach State Bar Council and satisfying it that he would confine himself only to profession of advocacy.-Madhav M. Bhokarikar v. Ganesh M. Bhokarikar AIR 2004 SC 1877.

Previous Page  | Next Page