2019 (4) TMI 885 - SC - Indian Laws

Cancellation of appellant enrollment as an Advocate - Bar Council of Rajasthan dismissed the application of the Appellant for enrolment on 16th January, 2000 and referred the matter for confirmation of the Bar Council of India - Held that - The suppression that was alleged against the Appellant at the time of seeking enrolment in the Bar Council of Himachal Pradesh pertains to his being in Government service in the State of Himachal Pradesh and his involvement in a criminal case. Subsequent acquittal cannot come to the rescue of the Appellant. Section 26 of the Advocates Act, 1961 confers power on the Bar Council of India to remove the name of a person who entered on the Roll of Advocates by misrepresentation. It is in exercise of this power that the enrollment of the Appellant was cancelled. The first order that was passed by the Bar Council cancelling his enrolment as an advocate was confirmed by this Court. The repeated attempts made by the Appellant later amount to an abuse of process. The orders impugned in the Appeals do not suffer from any infirmity and are upheld.

Summary

Issues:
Enrolment of the Appellant as an advocate, application for exemption from training, repeated applications for enrolment, challenge to rejection orders, impact of criminal case on enrolment, abuse of process.

Enrolment as an Advocate:
The Appellant, enrolled as an advocate in Himachal Pradesh in 1988, sought transfer to Rajasthan. However, his enrolment was canceled in 1995 due to allegations of suppression of facts. Despite multiple attempts, subsequent applications for enrolment were rejected by the Bar Councils of Rajasthan and India. The High Court directed reconsideration without influence from previous judgments.

Application for Exemption from Training:
The Appellant applied for exemption from training due to prior experience, but faced rejection. A Division Bench directed the Bar Council of Rajasthan to review the application impartially, leading to subsequent rejections by both the Bar Council of Rajasthan and India.

Repeated Applications for Enrolment:
The Appellant made several unsuccessful attempts for enrolment, facing rejections in 2000, 2003, and 2012 by the Bar Councils of Rajasthan and India. The Bar Councils cited reasons such as age restrictions and past cancellation of enrolment due to misrepresentation.

Impact of Criminal Case on Enrolment:
The Appellant, a qualified medical doctor, faced legal issues including arrest, judicial custody, termination of government service, and a conviction under Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code. Despite subsequent acquittal, the Bar Councils upheld the cancellation of enrolment due to misrepresentation.

Abuse of Process:
The Supreme Court upheld the Bar Councils' decisions, emphasizing that the Appellant's repeated attempts for enrolment amounted to an abuse of process. The Court advised the Appellant against further pursuit of the matter, highlighting the confirmed cancellation of enrolment and the lack of infirmity in the rejection orders.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeals challenging the rejection orders, affirming the Bar Councils' decisions to refuse enrolment to the Appellant. The Court upheld the cancellation of enrolment due to misrepresentation and advised against further pursuit of the matter, citing abuse of process.