1957 (2) TMI 63 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Professional misconduct by the appellant.
2. Validity of the tribunal's constitution.
3. Waiver of objection to the tribunal's constitution.
4. Alleged procedural irregularity by the High Court.
5. Merits of the finding of professional misconduct.
6. Propriety of the punishment imposed.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Professional Misconduct by the Appellant:
The appellant, an advocate, was accused of professional misconduct by Dr. Prem Chand Singhvi. The tribunal found the appellant guilty of "having got a false stay order written by the clerk by improper means and thereby he managed to take an illegal and undue advantage for his clients." The High Court concurred with this finding and ordered the appellant's removal from practice. The appellant admitted to taking the envelope containing the order to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate but denied any involvement in the fabrication of the order. The tribunal and the High Court rejected the appellant's defense and held him guilty of gross professional misconduct.

2. Validity of the Tribunal's Constitution:
The appellant challenged the tribunal's constitution, arguing that it was improperly constituted because Shri Chhangani, a member of the tribunal, had previously appeared for Dr. Prem Chand in related criminal proceedings. The Supreme Court agreed that "justice must not only be done but must also appear to be done," and found that Shri Chhangani's prior involvement created a reasonable apprehension of bias. The Court held that the tribunal's constitution suffered from a "serious infirmity."

3. Waiver of Objection to the Tribunal's Constitution:
The appellant did not raise the objection regarding Shri Chhangani's participation until the matter reached the High Court. The Supreme Court noted that waiver could be inferred if the appellant knew the facts and was aware of his right to object but chose not to do so. The Court found that the appellant, having ten years' standing at the Bar and legal assistance, must have been aware of his rights. The Court concluded that the appellant waived his objection by failing to raise it earlier, likely to take a chance on a favorable report from the tribunal.

4. Alleged Procedural Irregularity by the High Court:
The appellant argued that the High Court considered inadmissible evidence without giving him an opportunity to be heard. The Supreme Court examined the High Court's judgment and found that the High Court had called for and examined relevant records to verify the claims made during the arguments. The Court concluded that the High Court did not rely on any material not presented during the arguments and found no serious procedural irregularity warranting a fresh hearing.

5. Merits of the Finding of Professional Misconduct:
The Supreme Court noted that both the tribunal and the High Court made concurrent findings of fact against the appellant. The Court highlighted that the fabricated order was intended to benefit the appellant's clients and that it was "an irresistible inference that the appellant must have corrupted the officers of the court." The Court dismissed the appellant's argument regarding the failure to examine Shri Loya, the Reader, noting that he was an accomplice and his testimony would not have significantly altered the findings.

6. Propriety of the Punishment Imposed:
The appellant contended that the punishment of removal from the roll of legal practitioners was unduly severe. The Supreme Court was not persuaded, emphasizing the seriousness of the misconduct and the appellant's prior suspension for misappropriation of client funds. The Court stressed the importance of maintaining high standards of professional morality and integrity in the legal profession and upheld the High Court's order of removal as fully justified.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the findings of professional misconduct and the order of removal from practice. The Court emphasized the need for the legal profession to maintain high standards of integrity and the importance of ensuring that justice appears to be done. The appeal was dismissed with costs.