pskxoj ijso

1. 1 | P a g e
UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF LEGAL STUDIES, CHANDIGARH
PROFESSIONAL ETHICS PROJECT
CASE ANALYSIS- SHAMBHU RAM YADAV v. HANUMAN DAS KHATRY AIR 2001 SC 2509
SUBMITTED TO: - SUBMITTED BY: -
Dr. RABIA GUND HIMANSHU SINGLA
ROLL NO: 117/19
B.A. LLB. (8TH SEM)

2. 1 | P a g e
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................................2
FACTS OF THE CASE.......................................................................................................................................3
RULES APPLIED TO CASE ...............................................................................................................................4
SECTION 35: ..............................................................................................................................................4
SECTION 36: ..............................................................................................................................................5
SECTION 37: ..............................................................................................................................................5
SECTION 44: ..............................................................................................................................................6
ISSUES RAISED...............................................................................................................................................6
ARGUMENTS OF APPELLANT: .......................................................................................................................6
ARGUMENTS OF RESPONDENT:....................................................................................................................7
APPLICATION/JUDGEMENT:..........................................................................................................................8
CRITICAL ANALYSIS........................................................................................................................................9
CONCLUSION...............................................................................................................................................10

3. 2 | P a g e
Case Number:- Appeal (civil) 6768 of 2000
Date of Judgement:- 26/07/2001
Bench:- J. K.T. Thomas
J. Y.K. Sabharawal
INTRODUCTION
Advocacy is a noble profession and an advocate is the most accountable, privileged and erudite
person of the society and his act are role model for the society, which are necessary to be regulated.
Professional misconduct is the behaviour outside the bounds of what is considered acceptable or
worthy of its membership by the governing body of a profession. Professional misconduct refers
to disgraceful or dishonourable conduct not befitting an advocate. Chapter V of the Advocate Act,
1961, deals with the conduct of Advocates. It describes provisions relating to punishment for
professional and other misconducts. Section 35(1) of the Advocate Act, 1961, says, where on
receipt of a complaint or otherwise a State Bar Council has reason to believe that any advocate on
its roll has been guilty of professional or other misconduct, it shall refer the case for disposal to it
disciplinary committee. Generally legal profession is not a trade or business, it’s a gracious, noble,
and decontaminated profession of the society. Members belonging to this profession should not
encourage deceitfulness and corruption, but they have to strive to secure justice to their clients.
The credibility and reputation of the profession depends upon the manner in which the members
of the profession conduct themselves. It’s a symbol of healthy relationship between Bar and Bench.
The Advocates Act, 1961 as well Indian Bar Council are silent in providing exact definition for
professional misconduct because of its wide scope, though under Advocates Act, 1961 to take
disciplinary action punishments are prescribed when the credibility and reputation on the
SHAMBHU RAM YADAV
V.
HANUMAN DAS KHATRY

4. 3 | P a g e
profession comes under a clout on account of acts of omission and commission by any member of
the profession.
FACTS OF THE CASE
•This is a case dealt under advocates act of 1961.
•The complaint was filed by applicant against the respondent before the Bar Council of Rajasthan
who later referred this complaint as a disciplinary action matter to the state bar council.
•Under this complaint the Advocate of Mahant Raj Giri wrote a letter in response to the question
of his client that the judge who was dealing with the case of Mahant Raj Giri accepts bribes, to
give favourable orders in the favour of the one who is giving the bribe.
•The advocate instructed his client Mahant Raj Giri to either gain the favour of the judge by some
actions in the personal capacity or to send him an amount of rupees 10000/-.
•The respondent advocate accepted the fact that he had given the letter to his client in response to
the question of the client and the fact that the judge has been terminated because of taking illegal
gratification, the respondent followed the norms of professional ethics by bringing the matter to
light and informing his client Mahant Raj Giri that the judge accepts bribe is under purview of
ethical behaviour and is within the Ambit of professional ethics followed by the advocate.
•Furthermore, this act of respondent was in pure interest of his client and the matter of fact that the
money did not reach the judge its self-evident that the client became aware of the scrupulous
behaviour of the judge and therefore this cannot be termed as professional misconduct.
•The state bar council concluded after considering all evidences that the respondent was guilty of
professional misconduct and suspended him from practice for a period of 2 years.
•The respondent filed a petition under Section 44 of the advocates act. This petition was transferred
to the disciplinary committee of the bar council of India.
•The disciplinary committee of Bar Council of India substituted the reprimand punishment on
consideration of all relevant facts and directed expulsion of the respondent from the profession.
•The Bar Council of India concluded that very high standards of morality and unimpeachable sense
of legal and ethical propriety is expected from all advocates. Claiming, it is the duty of the bar
council of India to guard the professional ethics, and the potential disrepute on account of

5. 4 | P a g e
action of few should not disrupt the credibility of entire professional Arena and therefore, it is
having to be dealt in an utmost strict manner.
•Subsequently, the respondent filed another review petition but the review petition was debarred
stating the fact that the disciplinary committee cannot modify the earlier order because a different
view cannot be taken on a decided judgement on the same set of facts. As a result, the review
petition was debarred and the judgement of completely barring the advocate from the legal
profession was upheld.
RULES APPLIED TO CASE
SECTION 35:
Punishment of advocates for misconduct-
Where on receipt of a complaint or otherwise a State Bar Council has reason to believe that any
advocate on its roll has been guilty of professional or other misconduct, it shall refer the case for
disposal to its disciplinary committee. The State Bar Council may, either of its own motion or on
application made to it by any person interested, withdraw a proceeding pending before its
disciplinary committee and direct the inquiry to be made by any other disciplinary committee of
that State Bar Council.
The disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council shall fix a date for the hearing of the case and
shall cause a notice thereof to be given to the advocate concerned and to the Advocate-General of
the State.
The disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council after giving the advocate concerned and the
Advocate-General an opportunity of being heard, may make any of the following orders, namely:
•Dismiss the complaint or, where the proceedings were initiated at the instance of the State Bar
Council, direct that the proceedings be filed;
•Reprimand the advocate;
•Suspend the advocate from practice for such period as it may deem fit;
•Remove the name of the advocate from the State roll of advocates.

6. 5 | P a g e
•Where an advocate is suspended from practice under clause (c) of sub-section (3), he shall, during
the period of suspension, be debarred from practising in any court or before any authority or person
in India.
Where any notice is issued to the Advocate-General under sub-section (2), the Advocate-General
may appear before the disciplinary committee of the State Bar Council either in person or through
any advocate appearing on his behalf.
SECTION 36:
Disciplinary powers of Bar Council of India-
•Where on receipt of a complaint or otherwise the Bar Council of India has reason to believe that
any advocate, whose name is not entered on any State roll has been guilty of professional or other
misconduct, it shall refer the case for disposal to its disciplinary committee.
•Notwithstanding anything contained in this Chapter, the disciplinary committee of the Bar
Council of India may, either of its own motion or on a report by a State Bar Council or on an
application made to it by any person interested, withdraw for inquiry before itself any proceedings
for disciplinary action against any advocate pending before the disciplinary committee of any State
Bar Council and dispose of the same.
•The disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India, in disposing of any case under this
section, shall observe, so far as may be, the procedure laid down in section 35, the references to
the Advocate-General in that section being construed as references to the Attorney-General of
India.
•In disposing of any proceedings under this section the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council
of India may make any order which the disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council can
makeunder sub-section (3) of section 35, and where any proceedings have been withdrawn for
inquiry the State Bar Council concerned shall give effect to any such order.
SECTION 37:
Appeal to the Bar Council of India-

7. 6 | P a g e
•Any person aggrieved by an order of the disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council
made1[under section 35] 2[or the Advocate General of the State] may, within sixty days of the
date of the communication of the order to him, prefer an appeal to the Bar Council of India.
•Every such appeal shall be heard by the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India which
may pass such order 2[(including an order varying the punishment awarded by the disciplinary
committee of the State Bar Council)] thereon as it deems fit: 2[Provided that no order of the
disciplinary committee of the State Bar Council shall be varied by the disciplinary committee ofthe
Bar Council of India so as to prejudicially affect the person aggrieved without giving him
reasonable opportunity of being heard.]
SECTION 44:
Review of orders by disciplinary committee-
•The disciplinary committee of a Bar Council may of its own motion or otherwise review any order
1[within sixty days of the date of that order] passed by it under this Chapter: Provided that no such
order of review of the disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council shall have effect unless the
Bar Council of India have approved it.
ISSUES RAISED
Overall, three issues raised in the case of Shambhu Ram Yadav v. Hanuman Das Khatri:
•First being, Is the punishment of the expulsion of advocate from the profession is appropriate or
not?
•Second being, Whether the disciplinary committee in exercise of its review power could alter the
initial order of suspension?
•Third being, Is the Advocate guilty of professional misconduct?
ARGUMENTS OF APPELLANT:
•The Appellant contended the fact that the disciplinary committee concluding that the respondent
had no intention to bribe the judge is not relevant as there is no record on hand to suggest it. The
appellant also contended that the earlier order which was passed with consideration of all the the
relevant factors and evidences with conclusion that advocate was not fit to be a professional lawyer

8. 7 | P a g e
as having written such letter is an utter disregard for professional ethics and any punishment lesser
than expulsion from the profession cannot be imposed.
•It was contended that the advocates are not merely professionals but they are the officers of the
court. Besides the court they owe a duty of responsibility towards the society for public good and
administration of Justice. The said public interest is required to be protected by those on whom the
power has been entrusted i.e., the advocates who are the Guardians of public rights and play a key
role in retributive and distributive Justice. State bar council have requisite power and a duty to all
members of legal profession and inflict appropriate penalty on members who are found guilty of
professional misconduct.
•The appellant contended that the review petition which was filed by the respondent is without any
valid ground, as the penalty for permanent debarment is completely valid; as it is the duty of the
bar council to maintain professional morality and required standard and failure to comply will
invite appropriate action against the perpetrator. Credibility of council in taking the disciplinary
action either in law for any other vocation depends on how they deal with cases of delinquency
involving serious misconduct which has the capability to Erode the credibility of entire profession
and therefore, the punishment given to the respondent is commensurate with the Gravity of
misconduct.
•It was contended that the legal profession is not a mere trade or business but a noble profession
which has a heavy responsibility vested on the officers of the Court. It is evident that committee
has given the decision considering all relevant evidences, information, the age factor of the
respondent and the number of years the respondent has put into profession. It is expected from a
person who has put 50 years in the profession to have a higher standard of morality and irrevocable
sense of legal, ethical, virtual, and moral propriety and therefore the bar council decision of
anything less than expulsion of respondent may lead to a potential disrepute which may shake the
credibility of the bar council in dealing with cases of professional misconduct and the thrust laid
in by the professional advocates in the Council.
ARGUMENTS OF RESPONDENT:
•Respondents contented that the letter was written by the Advocate to the client not to render the
client bribe the judge and on a deep investigation it was found that the Advocate merely wrote the

9. 8 | P a g e
letter as a reply to the question of the client. It was simply a reply given regarding the the conduct
of the judge and was not an offer for a suggestion to the client to bribe judge.
•Respondents also contended that the Advocate was an old man of 80 years and has been in a
profession for last 50 years and is such a long innings of his professional career this is the first
time Such an allegation of professional misconduct has been put on him although there was no
intention for bribe, there may have been an irresponsible manner but not professional misconduct.
•It is also contended that, the committee should keep in mind the age and the past clean record of
the petitioner and the gravity of offence the decision of the committee to remove the Advocate
from the legal profession was not appropriate and cannot be considered justice as the impugned
order is not commensurate to the gravity of offence the appropriate punishment would be to
reprimand the Advocate and warn him that he should not encourage such activities in life and must
be careful while corresponding to his client.
•The respondents also contended that the bar council as a duty to ensure that lawyer's adherence
to required standards and take appropriate actions against them. This action of BAR council of
permanent debarment will inflict inappropriate penalty on the advocate and the requisite power
and the duty of supervising of the bar council will be severely questioned. Which would result in
weakened trust in the council's decision to deal with cases of delinquency and this erosion of
readability and reputation can have serious and catastrophic consequences.
APPLICATION/JUDGEMENT:
•In the judgement the council stated that legal profession is not a trade or business but it is a noble
profession in which the professionals have the responsibility to encourage honesty and strive for
justice for the client, if it is legally possible.
•The credibility and the reputation of profession depends on how the professional display
themselves in the public sphere they have the responsibility vested under advocate act that they
must display Supreme honor and discipline. They at no point of time can disregard the rules and
act arbitrary which makes the reputation of profession comes under the cloud. For this regard any
member of the profession.
•With all factors taken into consideration, the Council concluded that portion of the letter written
by the advocate contained considerable misrepresentation and professional misconduct. Tough,

10. 9 | P a g e
the advocate maybe replying to the question asked by the client he admitted that he is referred the
client to either bribe the judge of 10,000/- Rupees or convince him in the personal capacity the
committee by applying well settled principles and exercise of the Power vested by advocates act
decided to restrict the respondent from practicing further in the legal profession and the order given
by the state bar council advocate from practice by two years is not in accordance which the
misconduct.
•The fact that advocate is in the profession for past 50 years, the bar council expected a very high
standard of morality and unimpeachable ties of legal and ethical propriety, which the Advocate
failed to display.
•The bar council of India must be more sensitive to the potential disrepute an account of action of
the Advocate as it may shake the credibility of the profession and thereby put at stake other
members of the bar therefore under these conditions the bar is having no hesitation in setting aside
impugned order and debarring advocate from practicing further.
CRITICAL ANALYSIS
•Advocates Institute one of the privileged classes and enjoys exclusive rights for application of
law and Guardian of public rights. The advocates as officers of the court and representatives of the
client must adhere to a very high standard of conduct which is reasonable in status and
responsibility. It is worthy to note that the state bar council and Bar Council of India can take
appropriate disciplinary action against the advocates who fail to comply with the professional
ethics. Their misconduct is not only within their personal and professional capacity but it
endangers the professional capacity of the entire legal fraternity.
• To consider the scope of misconduct all advocate always must consider themselves in a
gentlemanly fashion, the responsibility towards the client as well as the court and other
stakeholders must be kept in mind. Misconduct is a wide expression and may or may not involve
moral turpitude, according to black's law dictionary misconduct is defined as "any transgression
of some established and definite rule of action, a Forbidden act, an unlawful or improper behavior,
willful in character, a dereliction of Duty".
•In different cases the apex court opined that the word 'misconduct' has no precise meaning and it
is open to the subject matter and context where it is used. In the context of an advocate any conduct

11. 10 | P a g e
that can render be advocate unfit for his profession or poses imminent danger to administration of
Justice can be considered as misconduct, for which disciplinary action may be initiated by any bar
council. The Advocate as an officer of the court is responsible to render services which are of
absolute performance and optimum quality; lapses in services involving incomplete and inaccurate
filing and wrong pleading before the court of law can be considered Grave and professional
misconduct. Other misconduct may include - personal check, verification, non-payment of court
and process fee, failure to remove objection, failure of professional admission, disservice to the
litigants, and avoiding Court ethics leading to delay in disposal of matters and reduced efficiency
of judicial system.
• Advocates are also required to uphold the dignity and maintain respectful attitude towards the
court as the bar and bench form a dynamic partnership assisted by a noble aim for great social and
moral responsibility to the public and ensure proper administration of Justice. The advocates are
the key who binds the mutual relationship ties between the judiciary and the public and maintain
ordinal relations between the two.
•The Advocate at no point of time should disrupt the decorum of the court or overstep the limit of
propriety. The standard of conduct of advocates is a broad Avenue and display a variety of Canon
of ethics and high tone of behavior. It can be held that professional ethics cannot be contained in
bar council rule or any other rule book as different avenues require different professional behavior
and different actions of conscience which will command the member of calling of justice to obey
rules of morality and utility. Therefore, the misconduct of advocate can be considered a contact-
specific dynamic and a broad Avenged topic which captures the role of advocate in society at large.
CONCLUSION
In the conclusion, the punishment of expulsion of advocate from profession is completely
appropriate and within the terms of the professional misconduct shown by the advocate. The
disciplinary committee exercise of review power could not alter the initial order of suspension the
decision could not be changed which was taken under complete consideration of all evidences as
the set of fact and matter of evidences is the same. The Advocate is guilty of professional
misconduct as writing the letter containing compromising information is not within the Ambit of
professional ethics of an advocate.