2021 (12) TMI 685 - HC - Customs

Levy of penalty on Advocate - Seeking deletion of para from order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) - objective of imposing penalty is only to impress upon the appellant that they ought to be more careful in future and do justice to their role and duties rather than take shelter behind technicalities and advocates who think they can defend the indefensible by giving their own skewed understanding of the law and misguiding appellants - HELD THAT - The legal profession is of vital importance not only to the administration of justice but also for the rule of law good governance; lawyers are to the civil society what soldiers are to the frontiers of a nation; lawyers profession is the only profession constitutionally recognized; Marcus Tullius Cicero centuries ago called this profession as the noble profession ; lawyers lend voice to the voiceless; they stand unfazed during social tumult; our Freedom Struggle was led by lawyers; our Constitution is the child of great legal brains; of course, others too have contributed a lot, cannot be denied; the great principles of governance and constitutional doctrines like the doctrine of Basic Structure are the contribution of tall lawyers; it is they who draw the chariot of law justice; words fall short to extol the greatness of this profession. In some occasions that are marked by their rarity, one may transcend the traditional contours of professional conduct; but this happens even with adjudicators as well; the ultimate object is to do justice to the cause; it hardly needs to be stated that the judgments orders should not be written with a pen dipped in acid; after all acidity affects health; the acidic words rob away the living beauty of the scripts; viewed from this angle, the highlighted portion of the observations in the subject order need to be expunged; it is in the best interest of both the stakeholders, namely, Bar the Bench; such expunction would only add to the beauty of the order in question which is meticulously texted with appreciable articulation. Petition allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Professional conduct of the petitioner questioned based on observations made by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals).

Analysis:
The judgment revolves around the professional conduct of the petitioner, who is an advocate, as questioned by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) in a specific case. The Commissioner imposed a penalty and made observations highlighting the need for the petitioner to be more careful in future and not rely solely on technicalities or misleading legal interpretations. The petitioner's counsel argued that the highlighted observations reflected negatively on the petitioner's professional conduct. On the other hand, the respondents' counsel contended that the observations were case-specific and should not be overanalyzed. The court, after hearing both parties and examining the petition, decided to grant relief to the petitioner for the following reasons.

Firstly, the court emphasized the vital role of the legal profession in ensuring justice, good governance, and upholding the rule of law. It compared lawyers to soldiers safeguarding a nation's frontiers and highlighted the historical significance of lawyers in shaping constitutional doctrines and principles of governance. The court acknowledged lawyers as the voice of the voiceless and praised their contributions to societal progress and legal development.

Secondly, the judgment quoted historical perspectives on advocacy and advocates, emphasizing their duty to fight for truth and uphold the integrity of the legal profession. It referenced the privileges and responsibilities associated with being a lawyer, highlighting the exalted nature of the legal profession as a franchise from the State. The court underscored the importance of courage, craft, and contention in advocacy, emphasizing the need for lawyers to present innovative and creative arguments fearlessly within the bounds of due process.

Furthermore, the judgment discussed the necessity of allowing intellectual collisions and novelty in legal arguments to broaden the horizons of due process and legal interpretation. It cautioned against undue sensitivity in adjudicatory processes and advocated for a balanced approach that respects the professional autonomy of lawyers while ensuring justice is served. The court highlighted the importance of maintaining a constructive and respectful dialogue between the Bar and the Bench to enhance the beauty and effectiveness of legal orders.

In conclusion, the court granted the writ petition, expunging the objectionable expression in the Commissioner's order that questioned the petitioner's professional conduct. The rest of the order remained intact, emphasizing the importance of maintaining a harmonious relationship between legal practitioners and adjudicators for the betterment of the legal system.