Supreme CourtJustice Surya KantJustice Joymala Bagchi Advocate misconductBar Council Bci disciplinary Committee Suspension of license Scandalous Professional Misconduct

Supreme Court Imposes Rs.1 Lakh… Supreme Court Imposes Rs.1 Lakh Cost On Advocate For Scandalous Allegations Against Woman; Suspends Bar License For 3 Years Debby Jain 23 Sept 2025 3:42 PM (2 mins read ) Share this “His license shall not be renewed without the Court’s prior permission”, the order stated. Listen to this Article The Supreme Court recently refused to interfere with a 3-year suspension order for an advocate’s license, noting that he was harassing the woman-complainant by levelling scandalous allegations against her. The Court also imposed a cost of Rs.1 lakh on the advocate and directed that his license shall not be renewed without its prior permission. “Having regard to the serious misconduct carried out by the appellant-advocate, who appears to be an obstinate character in making scandalous allegations against the respondent-complainant, we do not want to take any lenient view. The appeal is accordingly dismissed with a cost of Rs.1 lakh”, the Court ordered. Also Read – “Existential Crisis In Himalayas”: Supreme Court Poses Queries To Himachal Govt On Zoning, Deforestation, Mining, Constructions, Etc A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi was dealing with the advocate’s challenge to the order passed by BCI’s Disciplinary Committee, whereby he was held guilty of professional misconduct and punished with 3 years suspension from the roll of advocates maintained by the State Bar Council. Hearing the petitioner’s counsel, Justice Kant remarked, “Merely because matrimonial dispute is [there]…you are blackmailing this girl! You have not withdrawn [the matrimonial case]…”. Also Read – MP High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance Of Own Judge’s “Damning & Disparaging” Remarks Against Sessions Judge Notably, the cost amount was directed to be paid to the complainant as compensation within a period of 3 months. Case Title: MANOJ KUMAR SHARMA Versus PRIYANKA BANSAL, C.A. No. 6679/2024 click here to read order Tags Supreme CourtJustice Surya KantJustice Joymala Bagchi Advocate misconductBar Council Bci disciplinary Committee Suspension of license Scandalous Professional Misconduct Similar Posts “Existential Crisis In Himalayas”: Supreme Court Poses Queries To Himachal Govt On Zoning, Deforestation, Mining, Constructions, Etc The Supreme Court directed the State of Himachal Pradesh to file comprehensive and verified responses on a wide range of issues concerning its fragile ecology and environmental conditions, in the wake of unprecedented monsoon rains that wreaked havoc across the State earlier this year.The order was passed on September 23, in Suo Motu… MP High Court Takes Suo Moto Cognizance Of Own Judge’s “Damning & Disparaging” Remarks Against Sessions Judge In a rare move, the Madhya Pradesh High Court has initiated suo motu proceedings over a it’s own judge’s “damning” order making “disparaging” remarks against a Trial Court judge, while hearing a corruption-related bail matter. The Single Bench, in its order of September 12, had called for an inquiry and disciplinary action against a Sessions Judge… Supreme Court Raises Concerns Over Judicial Officers’ Career Stagnation Due To Delay In Promotions The Supreme Court expressed concerns over how young judicial officers are facing career stagnation due to systemic delays in promotions as a District Judge. The 5-judge constitution bench was considering the issue of whether a judicial officer, who has already completed 7 years in the Bar, is entitled to be appointed as a District Judge… Supreme Court Daily Round-Up : September 23, 2025 Links of today’s reports. Builder-Bank Nexus: After Preliminary Enquiry Finds Cognizable Offence Over Outside NCR Projects, Supreme Court Asks CBI To Register FIR In the matter where the Supreme Court ordered a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation into a builder-banks nexus exploiting homebuyers in the national capital region, the CBI was today allowed to proceed with registration of criminal cases qua projects outside NCR.On a mentioning, a bench of Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan and N Kotiswar… Judicial Officer Who Completed 7 Year Practice At Bar Eligible For District Judge Direct Appointment : Petitioners Argue In Supreme Court [Day 1] The Supreme Court today began its Constitution Bench hearing on the issue of whether a judicial officer, who has already completed 7 years in the Bar, is entitled to be appointed as a District Judge against a Bar vacancy.The 5-judge bench of Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, Justices MM Sundresh, Aravind Kumar, SC Sharma and K Vinod Chandran… ‘Disturbing’ : Supreme Court Slams Registry For 3 Years’ Delay In Listing C