Lawyers have duty to ensure that reputation of judges is not maligned: Allahabad High Court

The Allahabad High Court recently emphasised that lawyers too have a duty to prevent situations that may dent the confidence reposed by the public in judges.

Justice Kshitij Shailendra expressed his anguish after a lawyer (appellant's counsel) failed to inform that a matter mentioned for withdrawal before the judge was one in which he had previously appeared as counsel for a respondent, prior to his appointment as a judge.

The Court explained that such lapses, even if not deliberate, may affect public faith in judges. Lawyers also have a duty to ensure that such situations do not arise, the Court said.

"Bench functions on the faith reposed in members of the Bar and vice-versa. Both are complement to each other and work with one aim only, i.e., to administer justice for the society. It is the pious duty of both sides not to give rise to a situation that may shatter confidence reposed by us on us. The responsibility of members of the Bar increases more when their action may result in maligning or to an extent questioning the image of a judge in the eyes of public at large which may get an occasion to say that HIGH COURT JUDGES ARE NOW DECIDING CASES WHICH THEY WERE PURSUING FOR THEIR CLIENTS," the Court observed.

In the November 11 order, Justice Shailendra recounted that he came to know of that he had appeared earlier as a lawyer for one of the parties in this case only after he had permitted an application for withdrawing the matter.

He observed that it was unfair that the lawyer who sought the withdrawal did not inform that the withdrawal application was with respect to a case in which the judge had previously represented the respondent as a lawyer.

"Learned brief holder of Shri Rahul Sahai, Advocate, today, did not inform the Court that this matter should be placed before another Bench for passing orders on withdrawal application. Even on 04.10.2024, no mention was made in that direction, otherwise the Court would have directed listing of withdrawal application before another Bench on that very day. Since, I was not apprised of the aforesaid situation, I allowed the withdrawal application in Court and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. However, after the aforesaid situation came to my notice, I was compelled to change the order in these terms," the Court said.

The single judge added that court proceedings cannot be taken for granted in this manner, even if the mistake was intentional, unintentional, deliberate, or inadvertent.

The Bench eventually decided to take a lenient view and refrained from making any strict observations against the lawyer, but warned him to be more careful while addressing the Court in future.

It proceeded to direct that the matter be listed before another Bench after intimating the Chief Justice.

Advocates Manish Kumar Nigam, Rahul Sahai appeared for the appellants.

Advocates RK Misra, Arvind Kumar, Kshitij Shailendra (when he was a lawyer, prior to his elevation as a High Court judge) and Neeraj Agarwal appeared for the respondents.

[Read Order]