Train Junior Counsels Regarding Their Demeanor Before The Court: Allahabad High Court To Bar Associations

The Allahabad High Court recently expressed its 'displeasure' with the conduct of a lawyer, who, after finding that the Court was not convinced on the merits of the case, sought permission of the bench to argue the matter before another bench.

Calling his conduct, per se contemptuous, the Bench of Justice Vivek Agarwal did not take any adverse action taking into consideration the fact that the Lawyer had just put in four years of practice and has a blooming carrier in front of him.

However, the Bench did remark thus:

"I express my 'displeasure' in the strictest sense of the word 'displeasure' to such practice being adopted by lawyers, who are either lacking legal training in an appropriate chamber of Seniors or who are full of arrogance to ask for such favor of permitting them to argue their case before another Bench, when a particular court expresses its opinion of not entertaining their Application."

Thereafter, emphasizing that this practice should be brought to an end, the Court asked the Bar Associations of Allahabad High Court to compulsorily train junior counsel, as to what kind of arguments, they are supposed to make and what should be the demeanor in the Court.

With this, the Court accepted the apology tendered by the Counsel after he undertook not to repeat such mistakes in the future.

In related news, in a bail hearing before the Allahabad High Court, it was revealed that the advocates appearing on behalf of the accused and the complainant were acting in collusion, wherein the counsel for the complainant had filed forged vakalatnama at the directions of the counsel for the accused.

The counsel for the accused had 'arranged' a forged vakalatnama and engaged a lawyer to represent the accused to record no-objection to grant bail.