'Example Of Degrading Legal Profession' : Bombay High Court Castigates Lawyers For Misleading Court ; Refrains From Action After Apology
The Bombay High Court recently castigated two lawyers for misleading the court to secure bail for their client in an attempt to murder case. The court observed that increasingly lawyers were providing result-driven services putting their own careers at stake. Justice SG Mehare at the Aurangabad bench observed,“This is an example of degrading the legal profession. One can understand from...
The Bombay High Court recently castigated two lawyers for misleading the court to secure bail for their client in an attempt to murder case. The court observed that increasingly lawyers were providing result-driven services putting their own careers at stake.
Justice SG Mehare at the Aurangabad bench observed,
“This is an example of degrading the legal profession. One can understand from this case how much the litigant overpowered the profession, and law practitioners are providing result-oriented services to please the client without bothering [about] their career. The level of misleading the Court also reached the zenith. It’s a matter of serious concern.”
The bench added, “Whom to believe is a big question. Unfortunately, the newly entered junior lawyers are also involved in such practice by their seniors.”
Applicant Lakhan Misal booked for attempt to murder and culpable homicide in 2020 filed for bail earlier this year. On June 14, one advocate appeared for the complainant and said he needed time to take instructions.
However, instead of the injured victim or the complainant, it was revealed that an affidavit giving ‘no objection’ to release Misal on bail was filed by an ‘eye-witness’ to the incident. This ‘eye-witness’ was in a live-in relationship with the accused, the court noted.
“It was a misleading attempt of the counsels and the accused to secure bail…A clear inference can be drawn that he (applicant) sent her to his counsel to swear in the affidavit. The injured was kept in the dark.”
The judge noted that the counsel appearing for the applicant was a senior of the eyewitness’s advocate and they are practicing together.
“This was the level of practice to mislead the Court to please the client,” Court remarked.
Even though the accused’s counsel tried to justify the act as an ‘inadvertent mistake’ the judge did not believe. The court pointed out that the junior had the choice to not to file the eye witness’s affidavit.
Accordingly the court decided to refer the matter to the Bar Counsel for disciplinary action. However, after both erring counsels approached the judge along with officer bearers of the Bar Association and agreed to given an unconditional written apology, the action was withdrawn.
“Considering the unconditional apology, they have submitted and the future of the Junior lawyer, keeping the observations on record, the order directing inquiry and action by the Council of Maharashtra and Goa is called back. The written unconditional apology of the learned counsels is made a part of the record and kept in a sealed packet,” the order read.
According to a news report, the accused fled from police custody after the above order was passed, however he was later apprehended after he suffered an injury during the chase.
Case No. - BAIL APPLICATION NO.913 OF 2023
Case Title - LAKHAN PRALHAD MISAL VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA