GOVERNMENT PLEADER Vs. RAPLEADER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application by the Government Pleader under Section 25, Bombay Pleaders Act, made as a result of two applications to the District Judge of Kaira against Mr. R. The allegations against the pleader are three. The first is that in an application to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate purporting to be under Section 100, Criminal P.C. he suppressed the fact that in a previous order made by the District Magistrate in respect of the same person, (whose release was desired) the District Magistrate had ordered that Gomti was at liberty to go or stay as she wished, and also that in the same application he suppressed the fact that his own client was primarily responsible for this girl being detained at the ashram, and suggested, on the contrary, that other persons were responsible for it. The second charge against him is that in respect of the same case as the one just mentioned he made an application to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate for a transfer of the case without disclosing the fact that only a fortnight before an application for transfer had been made to the District Magistrate and had been refused. The third charge is that, having on two occasions filed a vakalatnama on behalf of four persons accused in a criminal case, at a later stage, when the matter came on for hearing, he accepted a vakalatnama from the complainant in the case. The District Judge has held all the charges proved, and has referred the matter for our orders. We do not think that the first two charges are proved, but we hold that the last charge is proved,

(2.) I take first the charge with reference to the application to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate under Section 100, Criminal P.C. This was in respect of a case under Section 498, Indian Penal Code, and related to a woman named Mani, aged twenty, who was claimed by one Shiva Mathur and also by Lallu Mulji as his wife. The matter appears to have begun with an application under Section 100 by Shiva Mathur. On that application the District Magistrate ordered, on 19 June 1933, that Mani should be restored to her husband Shiva. Shiva then took her away and detained her. Thereupon the next day Lallu Mulji told the District Magistrate what had happened and himself claimed Mani for his wife. The District Magistrate then ordered the production of Mani before himself. On 21 June, Mani made a statement in which she denied that she was Shiva's wife and alleged that he had outraged her. Thereupon on the same day the District Magistrate passed an order directing that Mani should be permitted to stay at a certain ashram at Shiva's expense. The wording of the order is not very clear. It was probably intended to be taken as an order that Mani should stay at the ashram; but it appears rather in the form of a permission or advice that she would be well advised to stay at the ashram. In any case, if she did stay, it was to be at Shiva's expense. This order purports to have been passed pending the disposal of the case under Section 498. On 7 August, the District Magistrate modified his earlier order or direction, since there appeared to be no prospects of the ease under Section 498 being quickly finished. On that day he passed an order in the following: terms-- I see no point now in Bai Mani residing at the ashram. In amplification of my order dated 21 June setting Bai Mani at liberty I do not. insist on the latter clause of my above order being adhered to and adopted. I leave it to the option of Bai Mani to leave the ashram whenever she likes and to go and stay wherever she-likes.

(3.) That order is dated 7 August 1933. On 11 August an application by Shiva, was drafted by his pleader, the opponent in this case, and was presented to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate three days-later on 14 August. The material parts of that application are these: In para. 1 the applicant says: The Collector of Kaira has passed an order ore the date 7 August 1933, to set at liberty my wife Bai Mani who was staying in the Nadiad? Anath Ashram. Notwithstanding the said order Bai Mani is still detained in the Nadiad Anatb. Ashram against her will.