LL.B.

TERM VI
FACULTY OF LAW, LAW CENTRE 1, UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

LB-601: ADVOCACY, PROFESSIONAL ETHICS AND ACCOUNTANCY FOR

LAWYERS

CLASSROOM ASSIGNMENT – CASE ANALYSIS

UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF:

DR. SWATI GARG JINDAL

SUBMITTED BY:

SUBODH ANAND

SECTION – I

LAW CENTRE- 1

EXAM ROLL NO.- 21310806758

CLASS ROLL NO.- 236159

1
CONDUCT UNBECOMING OF AN ADVOCATE,
LOWERING DIGINITY OF PROFESSION

Case Study: A.K. vs. R.S. 15(1&2) 1988 IBR 200, D.C. Appeal No. 41/1986

1. Introduction

This case, A.K. vs. R.S., revolves around the issue of professional conduct and the ethical
boundaries of legal practitioners. The primary concern is whether the Respondent-Advocate
committed professional misconduct by sending a notice to the Presiding Officer for remarks
made against him in a judgment. This case touches upon the responsibilities and ethical
standards expected of lawyers within the legal framework.

2. Laws and Sections Related to the Case

 Section 80, Code of Civil Procedure**: Pertains to the issuance of a notice before
instituting a suit against a public officer.
 Section 49(1)(c), Chapter II, Part VII, Advocates Act**: Details the conduct expected
from an advocate, emphasizing the maintenance of professional standards and decorum.

3. Facts

 Complainant’s Case:

The Complainant, a Presiding Officer, remarked against the Respondent-Advocate in a

judgment. Aggrieved by these remarks, the Respondent issued a notice under Section 80 of

2
 the Code of Civil Procedure, claiming damages from the Complainant. The Complainant
viewed this act as professional misconduct and referred the matter to the High Court, which
in turn directed the Andhra Pradesh State Bar Council (S.B.C.) to investigate.

 Respondent’s Case:

The Respondent admitted to issuing the notice but claimed it was done out of anxiety and
without any intent to proceed against the Complainant. He also highlighted that he had
apologized during contempt proceedings in the High Court and reiterated his advanced age
and lack of malicious intent.

4. Issues Involved in the Case

i. Professional Misconduct:

Whether the Respondent’s act of sending a notice to the Presiding Officer constitutes
professional misconduct.

The appropriateness of the Respondent’s actions within the ethical guidelines established
by the Advocates Act.

ii. Ethical Boundaries:

The limits of an advocate’s conduct when aggrieved by judicial remarks.

The duty of an advocate to uphold the dignity and decorum of the legal profession.

Recourse for Grievances:

The proper channels available to an advocate for addressing grievances against judicial
officers.

3
5. Observation, Judgment, and Conclusion of the Court

Proceedings and Observations:

The Disciplinary Committee (D.C.) of the Andhra Pradesh S.B.C. found the Respondent’s
actions unethical, emphasizing that alternative recourses should have been sought instead of
issuing a notice to the Presiding Officer. The Bar Council of India (B.C.I.) also deemed the
Respondent's actions as exceeding professional limits but accepted his explanation of anxiety
and lack of intent to harm.

Judgment:

The D.C. of the B.C.I. allowed the appeal, setting aside the order of the Andhra Pradesh
S.B.C. The Respondent was cautioned to behave properly in the future and avoid similar
actions, emphasizing the noble nature of the legal profession.

Conclusion:

The Respondent's act was recognized as a bona fide mistake driven by anxiety, and while it
did not amount to professional misconduct warranting severe punishment, it highlighted the
necessity for advocates to exercise restraint and seek proper channels for grievances.

6. Your Observation and Conclusion of the Case

Observation:

The case underscores the delicate balance legal professionals must maintain between
defending their reputations and upholding the dignity of the judicial process. The
Respondent-Advocate's actions, although stemming from personal distress, breached the
decorum expected from members of the legal profession. This breach, while not egregious,
warranted scrutiny and corrective guidance from the Bar Council.

4
Conclusion:

In conclusion, the decision to caution rather than severely reprimand the Respondent was
appropriate given the circumstances. The case serves as an important reminder for advocates
to adhere strictly to ethical guidelines and seek appropriate legal recourse without
undermining judicial authority. Advocates must remain exemplary in their conduct, balancing
their personal grievances with their professional responsibilities, thus maintaining the
integrity of the legal system.

Illustrations of Ethical and Unethical Practice

Ethical Practice Illustration:

Scenario: Advocate X, aggrieved by the remarks made by a judge in a written judgment,

believes the remarks are unjust and could harm his professional reputation.

Ethical Response:

Advocate X, adhering to the principles of professional conduct, decides to file an appeal

against the judgment, focusing on the merits of the case and the context of the remarks.
Additionally, he files a formal complaint with the appropriate judicial oversight body,
providing evidence and a detailed explanation of why the remarks are unfounded and
requesting a review. By following these procedures, Advocate X respects the judicial

process, maintains the dignity of the profession, and addresses his grievances through
established legal channels.

Unethical Practice Illustration:

Scenario: Advocate Y, similarly aggrieved by a judge's critical remarks in a judgment, feels

personally attacked and seeks immediate retribution.

5
Unethical Response:

Advocate Y, driven by anger and a desire for personal vindication, sends a threatening notice
directly to the judge, demanding an apology and financial compensation. In this notice, he
uses aggressive language and implies consequences if his demands are not met. This action
not only disrespects the authority and role of the judge but also undermines the legal
profession's standards by resorting to intimidation and personal attacks instead of legal
recourse.

These illustrations highlight the importance of maintaining professionalism and using

appropriate legal mechanisms to address grievances, ensuring that the integrity of the legal
system and the dignity of the profession are upheld.