LAWS(DLH)-2010-2-357

YOGENDRA PRAKASH JAUHARI Vs. BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA

Decided On February 15, 2010
YOGENDRA PRAKASH JAUHARI Appellant
V/S
BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this petition is to the orders dated 19th July 2008, 12th October 2008 and 24th December 2008 passed by the Bar Council of India ('BCI') as well as to the decision dated 27th November 2005 of the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana ('BCPH') and the resolution dated 11th/12th February 2006 of the BCI concerning the enrolment of the Petitioner as an Advocate.

(2.) In 1992 the Petitioner was appointed as a steno-typist in the court of the Sessions Judge at Gurgaon, Haryana. In 1997 the Petitioner was attached to the court of the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class ('JMIC'), Nuh. It is alleged by the Petitioner that he suffered harassment at the hands of the JMIC and requested for a transfer on 17th September 1997. However certain orders adverse to the Petitioner were passed by the JMIC which according to the Petitioner were set aside by the Sessions Judge, Gurgaon. It is stated that an FIR No. 3 dated 2nd April 1991 under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 ('PCA') was registered against the Petitioner on false pretexts. He was granted bail on 7th April 1999. It is not denied that ultimately the Petitioner was convicted in the said case and his services were terminated. However his termination order was made conditional upon the outcome of the appeal filed by the Petitioner in the High Court of Punjab & Haryana. The High Court, while admitting his appeal, suspended the sentences awarded to the Petitioner.

(3.) It is stated that while being posted in the Court of the District and Sessions Judge, at Ferozpur Jhirka, during the session 1992-95 the Petitioner sought permission of the competent authority and applied for a three-year regular degree course in law from D.S. College, Aligarh. He claims that the classes for the course at the said college used to be held in the evening/late evening hours. On 13th May 2005 the Petitioner filed an application for enrolment before the BCPH. However the Petitioner claims to have "got hints from certain sectors" that his application for enrolment would be turned down on account of the pressure brought on the BCPH by the JMIC. Accordingly, the Petitioner applied to the Bar Council of Delhi ('BCD') on 30th June 2005. The BCD enrolled the Petitioner as an Advocate with effect from 7th July 2005 and he was allotted Enrolment No.D-519/05. After his enrolment with the BCD, the Petitioner wrote to the BCPH seeking withdrawal of his application.