HC warns lawyers against dishonesty while presenting cases

Image
Press Trust of India Mumbai
Last Updated : Aug 17 2016 | 3:57 PM IST
The Bombay High Court has warned lawyers against resorting to dishonesty or wrong tactics while presenting their cases, and said such behaviour can be expected from litigants but not from members of the Bar.
A division bench of justices A S Oka and A A Sayed got irked when a lawyer, while arguing a petition filed by four persons seeking to quash a case registered against him, pointed out to the court that Justice Oka had in 1997 given legal advice to the company, Vidyut Metallics Pvt Ltd, in which one of the petitioners was a director.
The lawyer submitted to the bench copies of the letters and said, "Since this petition is coming up for the first time before this bench, I felt it appropriate to point this out to the court."
The advocate, appearing for the complainant company (Vidyut Metallics), however, told the court that earlier a contempt appeal filed by the same petitioners was heard and dismissed by this bench, and the issue of Justice Oka having given legal advice was not pointed out then.
The court then questioned the petitioners and their lawyer as to why these letters were not pointed out earlier and why they were submitted now.
"What made the petitioners point out these letters now? This is being done just to embarrass the court and make it look like we are being dishonest. Judges are also human. We may also err. How do you expect someone to remember what happened in 1997," Justice Oka said yesterday.
The petitioners' lawyer explained that the letters were not traceable when the contempt appeal petition was heard last year, but have now been traced by the petitioners from the office godown.
To this, Justice Oka said, "What made the petitioners go search for it in the godown? We can understand litigants resorting to such mischiefs but members of the Bar (lawyers) cannot resort to such tactics and dishonesty. Be honest. Members of the Bar are obligated to be honest."
The court then posted the matter for hearing on August 22 and directed the petitioners' counsel Ashok Mundargi to remain present before it on that day.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Aug 17 2016 | 3:57 PM IST

Next Story