You are on page 1of 16

Role of lawyers in the legal system

Posted by: Preeta in All, Bar and the Bench, General, India, Legal Ethics, Processes October 1, 2011 2 Comments 100 Views

   

inShare

The statement, “A lawyer is and must ever be the high priest at the shrine of justice”, a religious metaphor, reflects the view of the lawyer‟s special role on the administration of justice as contemplated by the American Bar Association in the first national code of legal ethics in the USA. The religious metaphor was developed in the context of viewing Courts as the „shrines of justice‟, and lawyers as the ministers of the “courts of justice robed in the priestly garments of truth, honor and integrity”. Even in a secular context, the statement still captures the essence of the role of an advocate in the mechanism of administration of justice in the society.

Scales of Law

That is a unique feature. The role of the advocate in these three capacities requires a closer scrutiny. to some extent. Particularly. and representing the client in the event of a dispute before an adjudicatory body. acts on behalf of the client. the lawyer has a particularly onerous and multi-dimensional role to fulfill. meaningful access to law requires the assistance of a lawyer. This is particularly relevant in an adversarial system of adjudication followed by common law countries which is characterized by a neutral adjudicating authority. and the third with his client. arrives at a conclusion. “A Counsel has a tripartite relationship: one with the public. J. another with the court. and representing the client.”[1] The satisfaction of the obligations and expectations arising out of these three relationships are frequently difficult to reconcile.At the outset. In fact. it is necessary to appreciate the role an advocate plays in the society. the lawyer plays an indispensible role in the mechanism of administration of justice. on the basis of the arguments and evidence placed before it. This involves providing legal advice in matters of rights. The development of lawyers as a class of professionals can be attributed to the need for trained persons who can form the competent interface to facilitate the interaction between the lay persons and the judiciary. Other professions or callings may include one or two of these relationships but no other has the triple duty. liberties or property of the client within the framework of legislative and legal rights. The role of an advocate in an adversarial system. The lawyer. which. . and occupies an exclusive domain with the privilege of pleading and acting on behalf of suitors being restricted only to enrolled advocates and attorneys. the members of the legal profession are conferred the status of privileged members of the community. in most jurisdictions. However. if law is viewed as a „public good‟ which is frequently technical and not selfexecuting. This monopolistic character of the legal profession entails certain high traditions which its members are expected to upkeep and uphold. as a professional. As expressed by Mathew. Therefore..

As has been frequently emphasized. At the same time. he also acts in the capacity of an officer of the Court. availing of the loopholes and the ambiguities of law. The contractual arrangement creates an obligation on the part of the advocate to offer sound legal service. An advocate is specially trained in the technical profession of „law‟. in essence.[3] It must be clarified that an advocate is obligated to act so as to protect and uphold the interest of his client by all fair and honorable means. and with his grasp over the subject matter. he should not let his personal opinion. is comparable to that of a legal technician. with professionals indulging in “briefs merchandise”. which he thinks will help his client‟s case”. however distasteful. is to represent the case of the client before the adjudicating authority. advance every argument. and ask every question. Furthermore. An advocate is essentially an adviser to his client. Lawyers collect materials relating to a case and thereby assist the Court in arriving at a correct judgment. it would be erroneous to view an advocate as merely a professional – that would lead to the risk of degenerating the legal profession into a trade or mere sordid pursuit for livelihood and accumulation of wealth. professional function consists largely of providing counsel for clients about how to escape or mitigate the incidence of the law‟s obligations. The oft-quoted comment of Lord Reid in the celebrated case of Rondel v. Wo¬¬rley succinctly conveys the essence of the duty of an advocate towards his client: “Every counsel has the duty to his client fearlessly to raise every issue. the functional role of an advocate. The role of advocates as officers of the Court is to assist the Court in the administration of justice. and place before the court all that can fairly and reasonably be submitted on behalf of his client. As a professional. or considerations of unpleasant consequences or reactions that he may expect to face in the performance of his duty towards his client affect the quality of services he provides to the client.[2] More importantly. being a responsible officer of the court and an important adjunct of the .therefore.

However. Good and strong advocacy by the counsel is thus necessary for the good administration of justice. The success of the judicial process often depends on the services of the legal profession. and secondly. [4] The Bar and the Bench constitutes the two wheels of the carriage of justice. the advocate owes a duty to his client in the capacity of a professional. as members of the Bar and officers of the Court. any illegal or improper means is used to mislead the Court. The primary duty of the lawyer is to inform the court as to the law and facts of the case and to aid the Court to do justice by arriving at correct conclusion. Since the court acts on the basis of what is presented by the advocates. [7] As observed. which is intended to serve the cause of „justice‟. It is a noble profession. [5] This involves two aspects – firstly. or trade or business. this may and often does lead to a conflict. and the advocate is under a sacrosanct obligation to ensure that he does not. In cases of . [6] What is imperative to be borne in mind is that the legal profession cannot be considered like any other profession.administration of justice. have the responsibility of „keeping the stream of justice pure and unsullied‟ so also to enable it to administer justice fairly and to the satisfaction of all concerned. the advocates are under the obligation to be absolutely fair to the Court. to ensure that under no circumstance. through any act or omission lead to the possibility of misrepresentation. and the need for a dynamic relationship of co-operation between the two is acute. All statements should be accurate. or mislead the court or obfuscate the case in any manner. and towards the Court in the capacity of an officer and the friend of the Court. to uphold the dignity of the judicial office and maintain a respectful attitude towards the Court. The difference between the legal profession and other professions lies in the fact that what lawyers do affects not only an individual but the administration of justice which is the foundation of the civilized society. The function of both the Bar and the Bench in an adversarial system of dispute resolution are clearly made out. the lawyer also owes a duty to the court as well as the opposite side. Advocates.

As it was observed in Dhananjay Sharma v.conflict. [11] It is for this reason. the latter takes precedence. He owes allegiance to a higher cause. even those that are fatal to his case. It is the cause of truth and justice. The role of advocates in the administration of justice. he has an overriding duty to the court. offends not only the rules of the profession. and to the public. and the obligations of an advocate as an officer of the Court are paramount. However where the conflict is irreconcilable. it is not only the profession which will suffer but also the administration of justice as a whole. as far as possible. “such conduct … has the tendency to shake public confidence in the judicial institution because the very structure of an ordered life is put at stake. if disregarded.”[10] If people lose confidence in the profession on account of the deviant ways of some of its members. He should not shy from producing all the relevant documents. In case of conflict between the most specific instructions of his client and is duty to the court. but a higher code of honor. that an advocate is under an obligation to ensure that he does not consciously misstate the facts or knowingly conceal the truth. He is none of these things. even those that are against him. State of Haryana.” It follows from this. and the tension between the role of the advocate as a professional vis-à-vis as an . that the role of an advocate as a professional has to be examined in light of the role of an advocate as an officer of the Court. which. [9] This imperative stems not from a code of law. This includes producing all the relevant authorities. to the standards of his profession. but strikes at the heart of the confidence of the public in the judicial system itself. the advocate tries to balance his competing obligations. as an officer of the court concerned in the administration of justice. [8] the most frequently quoted observation capturing the essence is the statement of Lord Denning: “It is a mistake to suppose that he is the mouth piece of his client to say what he wants: or his tool to do what he directs. He has the duty to present before the Court a fair picture of the case of his client to help the Court to arrive at a judgment in the dispute.

”[13] Being the custodian of the monopolistic power statutorily granted by the nation. to some extent. the lawyer is obligated to rise to the expectations of him in being a member of the society worthy of confidence of the community in him as a vehicle of social justice. Viewed in this context. and avail of the protection of the law. as a minister of justice. above all. The aspect of the advocate as a public servant is closely tied to the fact key role he plays in the developmental and disputeprocessing activities and. Union of India.officer of the Court can be understood best in light of the role of an advocate in the society. “in the building up of a just society and constitutional order. In an adversarial system. in the shrine of justice. „Justice‟ is the cornerstone in a democratic society characterized by the rule of law. [12] The public impact of the legal profession can be gauged by the observation by the Supreme Court in All India Judges Association v. wherein it was expressed that the administration of justice and the part to be played by the advocates in the system must be looked into from the point of view of litigant public and the right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21 and right to grant legal aid as contemplated under Article 39A of the Constitution. the advocate could be described. ****************************************************************************** . it can be said that the lawyer is indeed the channel through which the general public can access the law.

The role of lawyers in the framing of the . Jawaharlal Nehru. the Supreme Court has culled out the principles regarding duties and conduct of advocates. let us recapitulate various earlier orders of this Court as to the duties of lawyer towards the Court and the Society being a member of the legal profession. 12) The role and status of lawyers at the beginning of Sovereign and Democratic India is accounted as extremely vital in deciding that the Nation's administration was to be governed by the Rule of Law. before considering the fresh affidavits filed before this Court by the appellants. Professional Conduct and Etiquette .Advocates. Dr. in doing so. Motilal Nehru."Duties and Conduct of Advocates" : Supreme Court Explains Justice Sathasivam Supreme Court of India The Supreme Court in a recent decision. had the occasion to examine the rules regarding Professional Conduct and etiquettes of advocates. These include the names of galaxy of lawyers like Mahatma Gandhi.Rules and decisions of this Court 11) In the light of the above scenario. However. Rajendra Prasad and Dr. O. C. The matter eventually reached the Supreme Court where the court has brought a quietus to the proceedings by accepting the unconditional apologies on behalf of the advocates. to name a few. Sharma v.R. High Court of Punjab & Haryana. They were considered intellectuals amongst the elites of the country and social activists amongst the downtrodden. B. The relevant extracts from the judgment are reproduced herein below. which resulted in suo moto initiation of contempt proceedings by the Punjab & Haryana High Court. Rajagopalachari. Ambedkar.P. The case in hand dealt with the contemptuous conduct of advocates before a magistrate. Bhulabhai Desai.

An advocate shall use his best efforts to restrain and prevent his client from resorting to sharp or unfair practices or from doing anything in relation to the court. He shall not be servile and whenever there is proper ground for serious complaint against a judicial officer. avoiding scurrilous attacks in pleadings. and his appearance shall always be presentable. conduct himself with dignity and self-respect. 13) Section I of Chapter-II. opposing counsel or parties which the advocates himself ought not to do. bearing in mind that the dignity of the judicial office is essential for the survival of a free community. Lawyers are the officers of the Court in the administration of justice. to say the least.Duty to the Court 1. An advocate shall appear in court at all times only in the prescribed dress. during the presentation of his case and while otherwise acting before a court. and using intemperate language during arguments in court. Private communications with a judge relating to a pending case are forbidden. An advocate shall. 4. In a profession with such a vivid history it is regretful. He shall not consider himself a mere mouth-piece of the client. 2. Part VI titled "Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette" of the Bar Council of India Rules specifies the duties of an advocate towards the Court which reads as under: "Section I . 3. An advocate shall refuse to represent the client who persists in such improper conduct. it shall be his right and duty to submit his grievance to proper authorities. An advocate shall maintain towards the courts a respectful attitude. and shall exercise his own judgement in the use of restrained language in correspondence. 5.Constitution needs no special mention. An advocate shall not influence the decision of a court by any illegal or improper means. to witness instances of the nature of the present kind. .

first cousin. daughter. father-in-law. nephew. Court shall mean a Court. for the time being. Incorporated Law Society or a Bar Association. society or corporation. He should not act in a bankruptcy petition when he himself is also a creditor of the bankrupt. niece. husband. plead or practise in any way before a court. uncle. brother. He should not accept a brief from a company of which he is Director. Tribunal or Authority mentioned in Section 30 of the Act. Illustration I. if the sole or any member thereof is related to the advocate as father. "Executive Committee ". mother. sister. society or corporation. Bench or Tribunal in which above mentioned relation of the Advocate is a Judge. mother-in-law. II. brother-in-law daughter-in-law or sister-in-law. For the purposes of this rule. son. Provided that this rule shall not apply to such a member appearing as "amicus curiae" or without a fee on behalf of a Bar Council. 8. An advocate shall not appear in or before any court or tribunal or any other authority for or against an organisation or an institution. An advocate shall not wear bands or gown in public places other than in courts except on such ceremonial occasions and at such places as the Bar Council of India or the court may prescribe. An advocate shall not enter appearance. act. Member or the Presiding Officer. . aunt. if he is a member of the Executive Committee of such organisation or institution or society or corporation. An Advocate should not act or plead in any matter in which he is himself peculiarly interested. grand-son. grandfather.6. shall include any Committee or body of persons which. son-inlaw. by whatever name it may be called. 7. is vested with the general management of the affairs of the organisation or institution. 9. wife.

17) In the case of Ajay Kumar Pandey. The Bench as well as the Bar has to avoid unwarranted situations or trivial issues that hamper the cause of justice and are in the interest of none.. Saxena vs. This Court would come down a heavy hand for preventing the judges of the subordinate judiciary or the High Court from being subjected to scurrilous and indecent attacks.. acknowledged as a most respectable profession... admittedly. statutory as well as constitutional. this Court held that it is the solemn duty of every Court to proceed with judicial function during Court hours and no Court should yield to pressure tactics or boycott calls or any kind of browbeating. This Court held that." 15) In R. by an advocate only on account of the exalted position conferred upon him under the judicial system prevalent in the country.. The effect of such an act is not confined to a particular court or a district. the advocate was charged of criminal contempt of Court for the use of intemperate language and casting unwarranted aspersions on various judicial officers and attributing motives to them while discharging their judicial functions. or the State. (2000) 7 SCC 264. admittedly. Pandey." 14) In the case of Daroga Singh and Others vs. B. This Court held as under: "The subordinate judiciary forms the very backbone of administration of justice. In Re: . which scandalise or have . Balram Prasad Sharma. It is a dangerous trend. or certify the soundness of a surety for his client required for the purpose of any legal proceedings. If for passing judicial orders to the annoyance of the police the presiding officers of the Courts are to be assaulted and humiliated the judicial system in the country would collapse. Jacks Aviation Pvt..K. Such a trend has to be curbed. this Court held as under: "In our country. Advocate. No effort should be made or allowed to be made by which a litigant could be deprived of his rights.10. The poor.D. uneducated and exploited mass of the people need a helping hand from the legal profession.. one Additional District and Sessions Judge was attacked in a pre-planned and calculated manner in his courtroom and chamber by police officials for not passing an order they sought. The act committed amounts to deliberate interference with the discharge of duty of a judicial officer by intimidation apart from scandalizing and lowering the dignity of the Court and interference with the administration of justice. (1999) 1 SCC 37. a social duty is cast upon the legal profession to show the people beckon (sic beacon) light by their conduct and actions. (2004) 5 SCC 26. Ltd. "The Courts cannot be compelled to give "command orders".. it has the tendency to effect the entire judiciary in the country. (1998) 7 SCC 248. An advocate shall not stand as a surety." 16) In Mahabir Prasad Singh vs.

is given liberty of expression. This Court while sentencing him to ." Similar view has been reiterated in Radha Mohan Lal vs. (2003) 3 SCC 427.. Any adverse opinion about the judiciary should only be expressed in a detached manner and respectful language. freedom of expression. Rajasthan High Court. Saxena vs. Lawyers and litigants cannot be allowed to "terrorize" or "intimidate" Judges with a view to "secure" orders which they want. 20) In the matter of In re: Vinay Chandra Mishra (the alleged contemner). It is essential to the rule of law and liberty of the citizens.. No affront to the majesty of law can be permitted. The Hon'ble Chief Justice of India. (1996) 5 SCC 216]. is vital to the maintenance of free society.the tendency to scandalise. It plays its part in helping to secure the protection or other fundamental human rights. (1998) 4 SCC 577. It is a practical manifestation of the principle of freedom of speech. This is basic and fundamental and no civilised system of administration of justice can permit it.. vs. forensic skills of advocacy and enables protection of fraternity. Om Prakash & Ors. Freedom of expression." 18) In Chetak Construction Ltd. equality and justice. President of the Bar and Chairman of the Bar Council of India. therefore.. Freedom of expression in arguments encourages the development of judicial dignity.. The liberty of free expression is not to be confounded or confused with licence to make unfounded allegations against any institution.. But they equally owe countervailing duty to maintain dignity. therefore.. the contemner who was a senior advocate. The protection is necessary for the courts to enable them to discharge their judicial functions without fear..C. no lawyer or litigant can be permitted to browbeat the court or malign the presiding officer with a view to get a favourable order. therefore. much less the judiciary [vide D. 19) Advocacy touches and asserts the primary value of freedom of expression. The fountain of justice cannot be allowed to be polluted by disgruntled litigants. or lower or have the tendency to lower the authority of any court as also all such actions which interfere or tend to interfere with the due course of any judicial proceedings or obstruct or tend to obstruct the administration of justice in any other manner. The Judges are obliged to decide cases impartially and without any fear or favour. decorum and order in the court proceedings or judicial processes. is one of the basic conditions for the progress of advocacy and for the development of every man including legal fraternity practising the profession of law. (1995) 2 SCC 534. Judges shall not be able to perform their duties freely and fairly if such activities were permitted and in the result administration of justice would become a casualty and rule of law would receive a setback. this Court deprecated the practice of making allegations against the Judges and observed as under: "Indeed. The advocate or the party appearing in person. on being questioned by the Judge started to shout and said that no question could have been put to him and that he will get the High Court Judge transferred or see that impeachment motion is brought against him in Parliament.

Union of India & Anr. much need not be said on this subject to remind him of his duties in both the capacities. on the basis of his having been found guilty of committing contempt of court. We do not entertain any doubt that the Bar Council of the State or Bar Council of India. he has not tried to defend the said acts in either of his capacities. necessary to observe that by indulging in the said acts. Hence. On the other hand. a Constitution Bench of this Court overruled In re: Vinay Chandra Mishra (the alleged contemner) and held as under: "The power of the Supreme Court to punish for contempt of court.simple imprisonment for six weeks suspended him from practising as an advocate for a period of three years and laid down as follows: "The contemner has obviously misunderstood his function both as a lawyer representing the interests of his client and as an officer of the court." It also opined that:- "An Advocate who is found guilty of contempt of court may also. while dealing with a case of contempt of court. is yet limited and cannot be expanded to include the power to determine whether an advocate is also guilty of "Professional misconduct" in a summary manner which can only be done under the procedure prescribed in the Advocates Act. had initiated disciplinary proceedings against him and even punished him for "professional misconduct". however. It is. and has done distinct disservice to the litigants in general and to the profession of law and the administration of justice in particular.. (1998) 4 SCC 409. would rise to the occasion." 21) In the case of Supreme Court Bar Association vs. and taken appropriate action against such an advocate. he has positively abused his position both as a lawyer and as an officer of the Court. The power to do complete justice under Article 142 is in a way. when apprised of the established contumacious conduct of an advocate by the High Court or by this Court. he has tried to deny them. as already noticed. The learned Solicitor General informed us that there have been cases where the Bar Council of India taking note of the contumacious and objectionable conduct of an advocate. Under Article 144 of . in the facts and circumstances of each case. corrective power. as the case may be. though quite wide. as may be warranted. Indeed. which gives preference to equity over law but it cannot be used to deprive a professional lawyer of the due process contained in the Advocates Act 1961 by suspending his licence to practice in a summary manner. be guilty of professional misconduct in a given case but it is for the Bar Council of the State or Bar Council of India to punish that Advocate by either debarring him from practice or suspending his licence.

... When there is a deliberate attempt to scandalise which would shake the confidence of the litigating public in the system the damage caused is not only to the reputation of the concerned Judge but also to the fair name of the judiciary." .. whenever.. this Court took notice of the growing tendency amongst some of the Advocates of adopting a defiant attitude and casting aspersions having failed to persuade the Court to grant an order in the terms they expect. in the territory of India shall act in aid of the Supreme Court... High Court of Punjab & Haryana. The foundation of our system which is based on the independence and impartiality of those who man it will be shaken if disparaging and derogatory remarks are made against the Presiding Judicial Officers with impunity. The Bar Council which performs a public duty and is charged with the obligation to protect the dignity of the profession and maintain professional standards and etiquette is also obliged to act "in aid of the Supreme Court ". And. use of disrespectful language and at times blatant condemnatory attacks like the present one are often designedly employed with a view to taming a judge into submission to secure a desired order. Learned counsel for the parties present before us do not dispute and rightly so that whenever a court of record. when a member of the profession resorts to such cheap gimmicks with a view to browbeating the Judge into submission. whenever its attention is drawn by this Court to the contumacious and unbecoming conduct of an advocate which has the tendency to interfere with due administration of justice.. appropriate action should be initiated by the concerned Bar Council in accordance with law with a view to maintain the dignity of the courts and to uphold the majesty of law and professional standards and etiquette. Veiled threats... facts warrant rise to the occasion and discharge its duties uninfluenced by the position of the contemner advocate. & Sanghi. this Court observed as under: "The tendency of maligning the reputation of Judicial Officers by disgruntled elements who fail to secure the desired order is ever on the increase and it is high time it is nipped fat the bud.There is no justification to assume that the Bar Council is would not rise to the occasion." The Bench went on to say :- ". civil and judicial. Holding the Advocates guilty of contempt. Advocate vs. It must. abrasive behavior. It must act in accordance with the prescribed procedure.. Such cases raise larger issues touching the independence of not only the concerned Judge but the entire institution. (1991) 3 SCC 600. it is all the more painful. It is high time that we realise that the much cherished judicial independence has to be protected not only from the executive or the legislature but also from those who are an integral part of the system.. as they are equally responsible to uphold the dignity of the courts and the majesty of law and prevent any interference in the administration of justice.B.the Constitution "all authorities." 22) In M. records its findings about the conduct of an Advocate while finding him guilty of committing contempt of court and desires or refers the matter to be considered by the concerned Bar Council.

cannot take a lenient or indulgent view of this matter. And no sitting Judge will feel free to decide any matter as per the of his conscience on account of the fear of being scandalized and prosecuted by an advocate who does not mind making reckless allegations if the Judge goes against his wishes. State of Uttar Pradesh. (1981) 3 SCC 166. we would in fact be virtually issuing a 'licence' to scandalize courts and commit contempt of court with impunity. it was held by this Court that acceptance of an apology from a contemnor should only be a matter of exception and not that of a rule and expressed its opinion as under: "6. Jaikwal v.in fact it is more difficult to resist the temptation to do so rather than to adhere to the nail-studded path of duty. To pursue a populist line of showing indulgence is not very difficult -. 7. and not as an exception. much as the Court dislikes imposing punishment whilst exercising the contempt jurisdiction. therefore. this Court opined that there is no doubt that the Bar and the Bench are an integral part of the same mechanism which administers justice to the people. which no doubt has to be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection. It will be rather difficult to persuade members of the Bar. will be preferred by the litigants to the advocates who are mindful of professional ethics and believe in maintaining the decorum of courts. (1984) 3 SCC 405. all that a person wanting to intimidate a Judge by making the grossest imputations against him to do.D. where a lawyer hurled a shoe on the judicial officer which hit him on the shoulder. as a rule.23) In the case of L. If the fact that he renders a decision which is resented to by a litigant or his lawyer were to expose him to such risk. Many members of the Bench . If this situation were to be countenanced. and later on tender a formal empty apology which costs him practically nothing. By the very nature of his work he has to decide matters against one or other of the parties. advocates who can cow down the Judges. by someone. We do not think that we can adopt an attitude of unmerited leniency at the cost of principle and at the expense of the Judge who has been scandalized. who care for their self-respect. We have yet to come across a Judge who can take a decision which does not displease one side or the other. State of Himachal Pradesh. is to go ahead and scandalize him. Otherwise. or the decision rendered by him. it will sound the death knell of the institution. 24) In the case of R. We dread the day when a Judge cannot work with independence by reason of the fear that a disgruntled member of the Bar can publicly humiliate him and heap disgrace on him with impunity. if any of his orders. by threats of character assassination and persecution. We do not think that merely because the appellant has tendered his apology we should set aside the sentence and allow him to go unpunished. Institutional perspective demands that considerations of populism are not allowed to obstruct the path of duty. We are fully aware that it is not very difficult to show magnanimity when someone else is the victim rather than when oneself is the victim. some day. A line has therefore to be drawn somewhere.K. We. displeases any of the advocates. If such an apology were to be accepted. and make them fall in line with their wishes. to join the judiciary if they are expected to pay such a price for it. That is why the Court is impelled to act (rather than merely sermonize). appearing in the matter. Garg Advocate v.

. . Shareef & Anr. High Court of Punjab & Haryana & Ors. Scandalizing the Court in such manner is really polluting the very fount of justice. It is unquestionably true that courtesy breeds courtesy and just as charity has to begin at home. the appellant was adding insult to injury. 25) In Lalit Mohan Das vs. (supra)]. (1996) 7 SCC 99 and M. if brought into disrepute the whole administration of justice. a member of the Bar is an officer of the Court and owes a duty to the Court in which he is appearing. High Court of Punjab & Haryana. because the Munsif had merely upheld an order of his predecessor on the preliminary point of jurisdiction and Court fees. Advocate vs. [vide M. It ought to be a matter of equal pride to the Bar. He must uphold the dignity and decorum of the Court and must not do anything to bring the Court itself into disrepute. (1955) 1 SCR 757. .. Shamsher Singh Bedi vs.B.. be it advocates." 26) A lawyer cannot be a mere mouthpiece of his client and cannot associate himself with his client in maligning the reputation of judicial officer merely because his client failed to secure the desired order from the said officer. Orissa & Another. All the functionaries. Vs. The integrity and sanctity of an institution which has bestowed upon itself the responsibility of dispensing justice is ought to be maintained.Y. judges and the rest of the staff ought to act in accordance with morals and ethics. such conduct as the appellant indulged in was not a matter between an individual member of the Bar and a member of the judicial service. The appellant before us grossly overstepped the limits of propriety when he made imputations of partiality and unfairness against the Munsif in open Court. He may even submit that a particular order is not correct and may ask for a review of that order. Advocate General. At the same time. But members of the Bar will do well to remember that such flagrant violations of professional ethics and cultured conduct will only result in the ultimate destruction of a system without which no democracy can survive. be that of a Magistrate or the Supreme Court is sacrosanct. this Court observed as under: "A member of the Bar undoubtedly owes a duty to his client and must place before the Court all that can fairly and reasonably be submitted on behalf of his client. Sanghi. In suggesting that the Munsif followed no principle in his orders. A deliberate attempt to scandalize the Court which would shake the confidence of the litigating public in the system and would cause a very serious damage to the name of the judiciary. A discourteous Judge is like an ill-tuned instrument in the setting of a courtroom. 30) A Court. courtesy must begin with the Judge. AIR 1957 SC 250.are drawn from the Bar and their past association is a source of inspiration and pride to them. Hon'ble Judges of Nagpur High Court & Ors. which order had been upheld by the High Court in revision.

an Advocate being a member of the legal profession has a social duty to show the people a beacon of light by his conduct and actions rather than being adamant on an unwarranted and uncalled for issue.Advocates Role and Ethical Standards: 31) An advocate's duty is as important as that of a Judge. he should faithfully abide by the standards of professional conduct and etiquette prescribed by the Bar Council of India in Chapter II. an advocate should be diligent and his conduct should also be diligent and should conform to the requirements of the law by which an advocate plays a vital role in the preservation of society and justice system. An advocate is under an obligation to uphold the rule of law and ensure that the public justice system is enabled to function at its full potential. to his fellow lawyers and to the litigants. He should have integrity in abundance and should never do anything that erodes his credibility. An advocate has a duty to enlighten and encourage the juniors in the profession. 33) We hope and trust that the entire legal fraternity would set an example for other professionals by adhering to all the above-mentioned principles. An ideal advocate should believe that the legal profession has an element of service also and associates with legal service activities. Most importantly. In all professional functions. Any violation of the principles of professional ethics by an advocate is unfortunate and unacceptable. An advocate is expected to act with utmost sincerity and respect. Advocates have a large responsibility towards the society. An advocate should be dignified in his dealings to the Court. A client's relationship with his/her advocate is underlined by utmost trust. . Part VI of the Bar Council of India Rules. Ignoring even a minor violation/misconduct militates against the fundamental foundation of the public justice system. 32) As a rule.