'AoR's Job Is Sacrosanct, Can't Just Sign Everything' : Supreme Court In Contempt Plea Against ML Sharma & Advocate-on-Record

"What is troubling me is AoRs signing everything without reading…AoR's job is sacrosanct. If you (AoRs) become just signing authorities you are doing a disservice."

The words of caution came from the Bench while it was hearing a matter wherein the Supreme Court had issued contempt notice to the lawyers connected with the Special Leave Petition - Advocate ML Sharma, Advocate-on-Record Deepak Goel, for making averments in a petition which attributed motives to a division bench of the Madhya Pradesh High. The Bench categorically recorded in the order -

"...there is a great responsibility on AoRs before putting down their signatures. ML Sharma had drawn the petition, it was his bounden duty to have verified the complete petition before singing. It is not a learning experience for him, but for other AoRs who may tend to put down signatures without reading what they are filing. We caution them to be careful in future looking at the responsibility of an AoR."

Along with the Advocates, the Court had also issued contempt notice to Vijay Singh, Assistant Accountant in Municipal Counsel at Tikambarh who has signed the affidavit. The Counsel appearing for Mr. Singh tendered an unconditional apology. He also apprised the Bench that his client's medium of instruction throughout his education has been Hindi and therefore his command over the English language was not adequate to understand the gravity of the submissions made in the petition. The Counsel implored the Bench to grant him permission to file an appropriate application in this regard. Accordingly the Bench directed -

"…in so far as pleading w.r.t. imputation of motives to the High Court are concerned, although the contemnor cannot plead ignorance, he was briefed by the office of Adv. ML Sharma seeking to inform him (deponent) that it was based on some judgment of this Court and he was not in a position to question the same. Ld. Counsel appearing for his further states that an appropriate application will be filed. He has tendered an unconditional apology… Let him file the appropriate application."

Justice Kaul expressed concern that the AoRs are signing petitions without actually reading the submissions in its entirety.

"What is troubling me is AoRs signing everything without reading…AoR's job is sacrosanct. If you become just signing authorities you are doing a disservice."

The affidavit tendering unconditional apology filed by AoR, Mr. Deepak Goel stated that it happened inadvertently. The Bench granted him an opportunity to file an appropriate application.

Moving on to the affidavit of Advocate, Mr. M.L. Sharma, Justice Oka pointed out that though there were two allegations in the petition, one was that the division bench of the High Court had "unduly favoured" one party and the other allegation was of "judicial misconduct" of the bench, the affidavit only addresses the first issue, and is completely silent on the second allegation.

At the request of the Counsel, the Bench granted him an opportunity to file an additional affidavit.

As Mr. Sharma elucidated further on his case, Justice Kaul reckoned -

"By your pleadings you have spoiled a good case. We may or may not agree with the reasoning of the High Court, but the nature of your pleadings are not acceptable."

The matter is to be next listed on reopening week of January, 2023.

Case Title : Municipal Council Tikamgarh v. Matsya Udyog Sahkari Samiti and Ors| SLP(c) 18820/2022