Session I –20th JUNE 2022 “Conduct of Advocates & Disciplinary Proceedings” by Adv. RUPESH SINGH

Summary

The session explains the professional conduct expected of advocates and how misconduct may lead to disciplinary proceedings. Advocate Rupesh Singh combines references to legal rules with examples from courtroom practice.

Main Ideas and Practical Guidance

An Advocate Is an Officer of the Court

A lawyer’s role is not simply to seek a result for a client. Advocates must also uphold the court’s processes and be candid about relevant problems in their case. Professionalism requires balancing duties to the client with duties to the court.

Conduct and Presentation Matter

The speaker stresses respectful courtroom behaviour, appropriate dress, and maintaining dignity in dealings with judges, clients, opposing counsel, and court staff. Court dress, including the band and gown, should be worn in court-related settings—not used as a public display of status.

Misconduct Can Take Many Forms

Professional misconduct may involve a breach of duties to the court, client, opposing side, colleagues, the profession, or the public. Examples discussed include:

• Making unsupported allegations against a judge or attempting to influence a judicial officer.
• Filing groundless or repetitive complaints, or reacting disrespectfully when a case is dismissed.
• Promising to “fix” an investigation or obtain an outcome through improper influence.
• Neglecting a client’s case or failing to attend after accepting responsibility for it.
• Using unfair practices, behaving disgracefully, or practising outside applicable professional restrictions.

Manage Conflicting Court Commitments Responsibly

A pass-over or adjournment is at the court’s discretion, not an advocate’s entitlement. If two important matters clash, the lawyer should assess which requires their attendance and, where appropriate, arrange for a capable junior or another lawyer to appear rather than simply abandon a matter.

Listen as Well as Argue

Advocates should prepare thoroughly, but should not assume that speaking more will help. The speaker recommends listening carefully to the judge, responding to the issues raised, and avoiding repeated or unnecessary argument.

Duties to Clients Require Competent, Honest Advice

The advocate-client relationship has contractual and fiduciary aspects, and client communications may be privileged. The speaker advises advocates to:

• Give advice only within their knowledge and competence. If a matter is outside their expertise, they should say so and direct the client to someone better suited to handle it.
• Avoid frightening clients with inaccurate predictions or promising outcomes simply to secure a brief or fee.
• Avoid charging fees as a percentage of the amount recovered.

Discipline and Contempt Are Serious Risks

The speaker refers to the Advocates Act, 1961, the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, and Bar Council of India rules. He distinguishes professional discipline from contempt proceedings, while noting that conduct in court can raise both issues.

As described in the lecture, a complaint may lead to notice, a reply from the advocate, and consideration by a disciplinary committee. Possible outcomes include reprimand, suspension of the right to practise, or removal from the roll of advocates. The speaker says an appeal may be made to the Bar Council of India under section 37, followed by an appeal to the Supreme Court under section 38. He cites a 60-day period for the former appeal. An apology may be considered, but should not be treated as a guaranteed way to avoid consequences.

Examples Discussed

• The speaker discusses the B.C. Mishra matter, describing a senior advocate’s confrontation with a judge and the resulting contempt and disciplinary consequences.
• He refers to the Prashant Bhushan contempt case as an example that seniority does not place an advocate above professional accountability.
• He also cites examples involving allegedly false claims, improper courtroom conduct, and advocates who faced disciplinary action. These are presented as illustrations from the speaker’s account.

Appearing in Person

In response to a student’s question, the speaker says a person may be permitted to argue in person in some High Court or Supreme Court matters, subject to the court’s permission. He distinguishes this from district-court practice and mentions legal aid as an option for people unable to afford counsel.

Speakers and Sources

Speakers

• Advocate Rupesh Singh — main lecturer.
• Dr. Shahista S. Inamdar — principal/course director; delivered the welcome address and closing remarks.
• Neha — session host/moderator.
• Tripura Patrangka — introduced the guest speaker.
• Nita Rathod — delivered the vote of thanks.
• An unnamed student — asked whether a party may appear as a plaintiff in person.
• Other college representatives and students — briefly participated in the introductions and closing; some names are unclear in the subtitles.

Legal Authorities and Examples Mentioned

• Advocates Act, 1961.
• Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.
• Bar Council of India rules.
• The B.C. Mishra matter.
• The Prashant Bhushan contempt case.
• Supreme Court decisions and examples cited by the lecturer, including rulings concerning arrest procedure and allegedly false claims.