Lawyer's duty towards court, client of 'utmost importance': Punjab and Haryana High Court

Saurabh Malik
Chandigarh, April 7

Advertisement

In a significant order liable to change the way the Bar assists the Bench in the adjudication of matters, the Punjab and Haryana High Court today asserted that an advocate’s duty towards the court and the client was of “utmost importance for the survival of the institution itself”. The assertion came as Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri invoked the court’s extraordinary jurisdiction to explore the “unattended areas of legal ethics pertaining to duty of an advocate towards the court and his client”.

Justice Puri also made it clear that other areas pertaining to legal ethics, too, were required to be addressed at a macro-level. Inviting suggestions from “various corners” for streamlining the system, Justice Puri requested Chairman of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana through its chairman, and the Bar Association of Punjab and Haryana High Court through its president, to come out with valuable recommendations on the issue. Senior advocate Anupam Gupta was also appointed as an amicus curiae or the friend of the court to assist the Bench in the matter.

Justice Puri was hearing a case in which the petitioners withdrew previous petitions, only to file another plea through a different counsel after a gap of about two months. The Bench observed some of the present petitioners had earlier filed a quashing petition based upon a compromise. It was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a fresh petition with better particulars. Some of the present petitioners again filed a quashing petition based upon the compromise. Again the petitioners withdrew the petition, but moved the court again.

Justice Puri noticed that the petition was filed without disclosing the filing of the previous pleas, which were dismissed as withdrawn. The counsel was unable to justify the reasons for not bringing to the court’s notice.

Justice Puri asserted the court at the current stage deemed it necessary to take judicial cognisance of such kind of practice pertaining to legal ethics as the subject had hitherto been ignored. An endeavour could be made for future purposes “as to what safeguards and steps should be followed to restore and streamline the esteemed principles of legal ethics which should be imbibed in the legal system”.

Justice Puri added the present petition had been withdrawn, but the proceedings would continue only to a limited extent of getting suggestions. The case will now come up for further hearing in May.