LAXMINARAYAN AGRAWAL Vs. SMT. KALPANA PANDEY AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is against the order dated 13.09.2017 passed in Criminal Revision No.25/2017, whereby the order dated 23.06.2017, passed in criminal complaint case No.891/2015 framing charges against the petitioner, was affirmed.

(2.) Facts of the case, in brief, are that a complaint was filed by respondent No.1 Smt. Kalpana Pandey that she is a practicing Advocate at Korba Bar since 1997. Initially in 1997 the procedure was that a mandatory training was required under some senior Advocate, therefore, after completion of such training her name was registered in the Madhya Pradesh Bar Council in the year 1998. It is contended that in the meanwhile, the clause of mandatory training was erased and the registration of advocates were considered from date of their original enrollment. It is stated that States of Madhya Pradesh & Chhattisgarh were bifurcated in the year 2000 and the documents with respect to the Advocates, who were practicing at Chhattisgarh Bar, were transferred to the Chhattisgarh Bar Council. Therefore, the complainant had filed an application to the Bar Council of Chhattisgarh that her date of registration of 1998 may be amended and her registration be made from 1997 and was amended accordingly by the Bar Council of India.

(3.) Thereafter, it is the case of the complainant that she was aspirant to be appointed as a Notary and had filed the application for appointment as Notary at Korba. As for appointment to the post of Notary particular period of experience at Bar was required so the respondent No.1 made an application in this regard to the District Bar Association, Korba and accordingly experience certificate was issued on 15.01.201 In the meanwhile, the Chhattisgarh State Bar Council amended the date of registration of the complainant to be of the year 1997. Consequent upon such amendment, the complainant again made an application to the Bar Association that in the register of the Bar Association instead of 1998 date of practice/enrollment of the complainant be recorded as 1997. Having been made such application, the President, District Bar Association, in his personal capacity misusing his position as Bar President without any resolution of Bar Association projecting himself to be as President of Bar Association made allegations over the complainant that the complainant has tampered & fabricated the date of registration and different letters were thrown to the Superintendent of Police, Collector, Secretary M.P. Bar Council and copies were forwarded to the Chief Justice of India, New Delhi, Chief Justice & Registrar General, High Court of Chhattisgarh, Bilaspur etc.