BCD Moves Delhi HC To Provide Details Of Complaints Against Lawyers

The Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) recently moved the Delhi High Court against the order of a single-judge mandating it to provide information on all pending complaints against lawyers.

A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sachin Datta was hearing the matter.

According to the Advocates Act, 1961, the State Bar Councils and the Bar Council of India (BCI) are not subject to the writ jurisdiction of the High Courts when it comes to their day-to-day operations and disciplinary processes.

Furthermore, there is no provision for involvement by the High Courts or any other court, except the Supreme Court, the BCD stated.

Last month, single-judge bench of Justice Prathiba M. Singh directed BCD to furnish a chart detailing all ongoing complaints against lawyers, including the dates of filing and the dates of initial notices in all of those cases.

The order was delivered after four lawyers appeared in court to challenge notifications issued by the BCD in response to a complaint.

It was claimed that these lawyers represented a plaintiff without necessary authorization and vakalatnama.

Nevertheless, the lawyers stated that this was the second complaint filed on similar claims, and the previous one was dismissed by the BCD. It was also mentioned that the individual who submitted the complaint is represented by BCD Secretary Sanjay Rathi.

The proceedings against the petitioner-advocates were then halted by the single bench.

The BCD claimed in its appeal that under the provisions of the Advocates Act, an appeal against an order of a state bar council such as the BCD must be filed with the BCI and not the High Court.

According to Section 38 of the Advocates Act, any individual aggrieved by an order made by the BCI’s disciplinary committee may file an appeal with the Supreme Court within sixty days after the day the order is notified to him, the plea held.

It further claimed that the case against the four lawyers is at the threshold and only a preliminary notice has been issued by the full house and the issue has not yet forwarded to the disciplinary committee.

“The Appellant herein is confining the present Letters Patent Appeal against the impugned order by the Ld. Single Judge, wherein powers, authority, impartiality, independence and integrity of the Bar Council of Delhi has been put under challenge,” the plea noted.

After hearing the aforementioned arguments, the division bench issued notice to the four advocates and listed the matter for further hearing on April 17, 2023.