Lawyers skipping hearings is professional misconduct, says Allahabad high court

Time of India

a day ago

1
2
3
Prayagraj: Advocates not appearing for listed cases amount to professional misconduct, said the Allahabad high court while hearing a bail application where no one was present on behalf of the applicant to argue the matter.
When the case list was revised by the court and no lawyer appeared for the applicant in a bail matter, Justice Krishan Pahal said, "Advocates are not appearing in majority of listed cases that too on multiple dates. Non-appearance of the counsel for the applicant amounts to professional misconduct. It also tantamount to bench-hunting or forum-shopping," the court further added. When the bail application was called out at the outset, the court noted that such non-appearance was not a first or isolated incident as it had occurred on previous dates as well.
However, the counsel for the informant informed the court that the statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) had already been recorded and the trial was at its conclusive end.
Taking a serious note of non-appearance of the counsel for the applicant, the court referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Ishwarlal Mali Rathod vs Gopal (2021) in which it was held that courts shall not grant adjournments in a routine or mechanical manner and must not become a party to delays in the delivery of justice.
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
Luxurious Apartments With a Smart 20:40:40 Payment Plan
L&T The Gateway
Book Now
Undo
While noting that the mere pendency of a bail application cannot confer any right upon the applicant and that it cannot be allowed to remain pending indefinitely, the court said, "The applicant cannot be permitted to dilute the stream of justice by repeatedly remaining absent from judicial proceedings without any reasonable explanation.
Absence of any reason for non-appearance is blatant abuse of process of law, even though the order is available on the website of the high court."
"The resources of the court which include precious judicial time are scarce and already stretched beyond elastic limits. Valuable court time, which is required to be engaged in adjudication of serious judicial action, is wasted on frivolous and vexatious litigation, which is misconceived and is an abuse of the process of law. A judicial system has less than sufficient resources to afford justice without unreasonable delay to those having genuine grievances.
Therefore, the courts have held that totally unjustified use of judicial time must be curbed and the party so wasting precious judicial resources must be required to compensate not only the adversary but also the judicial system itself," the court added.
In this conspectus, the court in its decision found that the applicant Pooja has lost interest in pursuing the matter. Therefore, by the efflux of time, it seems to have been rendered infructuous. Hence, the court rejected the bail application. "The instant case is the misuse of the process of court by the applicant," the court added in its order dated July 8.