Did the SC Uphold the 3-Year Suspension of Advocate for Scandalous Allegations Against a Woman Complainant?
Click to start listening
Synopsis
In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court affirmed a three-year suspension of an advocate for making scandalous claims against a female complainant. This decision underscores the court's commitment to upholding legal ethics and protecting individuals from defamation.
Key Takeaways
- Supreme Court's Ruling: Upheld three-year suspension of an advocate.
- Serious Misconduct: Advocate made scandalous allegations against a woman.
- Financial Penalty: Rs 1 lakh to be paid as cost.
- License Renewal: Bar Council cannot renew advocate's license without court's permission.
- Ethical Standards: Reinforces the importance of professional conduct in law.
New Delhi, Sep 23 (NationPress) The Supreme Court has confirmed the three-year suspension of an advocate from legal practice, a decision made by the Bar Council of India (BCI), due to the advocate's scandalous allegations against a female complainant.
A bench comprising Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi dismissed the statutory appeal submitted by advocate Manoj Kumar Sharma and declined to offer him any relief.
The apex court was reviewing a statutory appeal against the BCI’s December 2023 ruling, which found Sharma guilty of professional misconduct and led to his three-year suspension from the roll of advocates.
The Justice Surya Kant-led Bench remarked that the lawyer had engaged in serious misconduct that warranted a lack of leniency from the apex court.
“In light of the serious misconduct committed by the appellant-advocate, who has shown obstinacy in making scandalous allegations against the respondent-complainant, we choose not to adopt a lenient approach. The appeal is hereby dismissed with a cost of Rs 1 lakh,” the court ordered.
The bench not only upheld the suspension but also mandated the recovery of costs from Sharma.
“The Collector, Agra, is instructed to attach the appellant's properties for the recovery of the cost amount, which shall be compensated to the respondent (Priyanka Bansal) within three months,” it directed.
Moreover, the Supreme Court instructed the BCI not to renew Sharma’s license without its prior approval and to provide a compliance report upon the completion of his suspension.
“The Bar Council is ordered not to renew the appellant's license without prior permission from this Court. Furthermore, after the completion of the sentence, a report in this regard shall be submitted to the Secretary General of this Court,” the top court stated.
Point of View
This ruling by the Supreme Court highlights the judiciary's unwavering commitment to uphold the principles of justice and professional conduct within the legal community. By addressing such misconduct decisively, the court reinforces the importance of ethical standards and accountability in legal practice.
NationPress
24/09/2025
Frequently Asked Questions
What was the reason for the advocate's suspension?
The advocate was suspended for making scandalous allegations against a woman complainant, which was deemed serious misconduct by the Bar Council of India.
How long is the suspension period?
The suspension period is three years.
What were the financial repercussions of the ruling?
The Supreme Court ordered the advocate to pay Rs 1 lakh as costs, which will be compensated to the complainant.
Will the advocate's license be renewed automatically?
No, the Bar Council of India is directed not to renew the advocate's license without prior permission from the Supreme Court.
What is the significance of this ruling?
This ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to ethical legal practice and the protection of individuals from defamatory statements.
