S RAGHBIR SINGH Vs. CROWN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition for reinstatement by Raghbir Singh who had been dismissed from practice as a pleader on 7 July 1941, by a Pull Bench of the Lahore High Court.

(2.) Raghbir Singh was, after passing his LL. B. examination, enrolled as a Pleader on 31 of July 1923 and his ordinary place of busi. ness was to be at Montgomery. The record shows that he was practising at Amritsar in 1928 and on 9 September 1928, one Bhagat Singh made a complaint against him that he had received Rs. 170/- from him fraudulently. As in the meanwhile Raghbir Singh had left Amritsar and started practice at Pakpattan, the matter was sent for report to the District Judge, Montgomery at Lahore. Another complaint by one Nihal Chand was also made against Raghbir Singh charging him with cheating him (Nihal Chand) by depriving him of a certain amount of money. This matter was sent to the District Judge, Amritsar, who made a report disbelieving the statement of Raghbir Singh and held that a prima facie case was made out. The matter was also reported to the then President of the Bar Council, Mr. Jagan Nath Aggarwal, whose report was that a prima facie case had been made out. With regard to the complaint of Bhaga Singh, Mr. Blacker, who was then the District Judge of Montgomery, made a report that Raghbir Singh's explanation was unsatisfactory. The matter was placed before Tek Chand, J. and on 16 April 1931 he ordered that as the material placed was not sufficient for taking action under the Legal Practitioners Act, no further action need be taken. On 19tb May 1931 one Naghar Singh made a complaint againt Raghbir Singh alleging professional misconduct of taking money from him and not prosecuting his case. On 19 April 1932, one Jamal made a complaint against Raghbir Singh, saying that he had engaged him to prosecute his application for insolvency. He (Raghbir Singh) filed the application but got it dismissed in default and took no further aotion. On 20 January 1933 one Chandar Mani complained that Raghbir Singh was employing touts. The matter of Jamal was settled by the President of the Bar Council, Mr. Jagan Nath Aggarwal. Raghbir Singh returned the money to Jamal and the matter was laid at rest. In 1938 on 21 December one Chbajju Ram made a complaint to the then Chief Justice that he had brought a criminal complaint against Raghbir Singh in the Court of the District Magistrate,- Lahore, but nothing had been done. The nature of the com. plaint is not made clear in the petition to the Chief Justice.

(3.) After all this, on 1 September 1939 a case was instituted against Raghbir Singh under Secs.466, 467/109, 471/109, 209/109 and 193 of Indian Penal Code. This case was a very serious one in which the allegations were that by forging a false pro-note and power of attorney purporting to be on behalf of his client, he got a false decree passed against his client in favour of his own brother and thereby he in conspiracy with one Mohan Singh Pujji secured Rs. 2,900 which belonged to his client. In this case he was convicted by the learned Magistrate of forging (1) power of attorney, (2) statement of his client confessing judgment, (8) he abetted the forgery of a pronote, (4) he forged a receipt purporting to be by his client, (5) for dishonestly using a forged pronote, (6) for getting a false claim made against his own client, and (7) for fabricating false evidence. He was sentenced to aggregate sentence of five years and nine months rigorous imprisonment. On appeal which was heard by Bhide, J. the conviction was upheld on all other counts excepting under Secs.491 and 193 and his sentence was reduced to a total of 3 years. It may be pointed out that along with him his two brothers Balraj Singh and Bhagat Ram SiDgh were also convicted for similar offences and so was Mohan Singh Pujji. The matter had been reported to the High Court on its disciplinary jurisdiction side and a Pull Bench consisting of the then Chief Justice Sir Douglas Young, Blacker and Sale, JJ. dismissed Raghbir Singh and they particularly relied on the following passage from the judgment of Bhide J.: Raghbir Singh is the ring leader of the conspiracy and was chiefly responsible for the commission of the serious offences disclosed in those trials--His conduct has been despicable. Ha has cheated ignorant clients, who reposed confidence in him and has also misguided his younger brothers and involved them in serious crimes. In view of all the circumstances, the aggregate sentence he will have to undergo is, if anything, lenient.