Latest news with #RoopBansal
News18
5 days ago
- Politics
- News18
Bar Council Issues Notices To 16 Lawyers in Punjab & Haryana HC Over 'Bench Hunting'
Last Updated: Bench hunting is an unethical practice where litigants or their counsel aim to have a case heard by a particular judge or bench perceived as favourable to secure a desired outcome The privilege committee of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana has issued notices to 16 lawyers over allegations of bench hunting in the high court, considering it a severe threat to the dignity and ethics of the legal profession. Bench hunting, or forum shopping, is an unethical practice where litigants or their counsel aim to have a case heard by a particular judge or bench perceived as favourable to secure a desired outcome. Central to the controversy is the high-profile case of Roop Bansal v State of Haryana, a corruption case involving a Gurugram-based realtor and a former special CBI court judge. Certain advocates allegedly engaged in bench hunting to obtain favourable orders in this matter. The privilege committee has sought responses from several lawyers of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Supreme Court, as well as senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mukul Rohatgi. 'This Committee is of the considered view that it is necessary at this stage to seek responses from Senior Advocates Sh. Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Sh. Mukul Rohatgi, in order to fairly and comprehensively adjudicate the matter at hand," the notice states. Those named in the notice include senior advocates Rakesh Nehra and Puneet Bali, as well as advocates JK Singla, Sidharth Bhardwaj, Aditya Aggarwal, Gagandeep Singh, Anmol Chandan, Baljeet Beniwal, Harsh Sharma, Sauhard Singh, Rupender Singh, Ankit Yadav, Ashim Singla, Aakash Sharma, Bindu, and APS Shergil. All have been directed to appear before the committee on August 16. The notice states that, prima facie, Singla orchestrated the plan but suggests it is 'highly unbelievable" that he acted alone, alleging that the effort was organised with ingenious minds possibly pulling strings behind the scenes. The privilege committee was formed on August 4, 2024, following directions from bar council chairman Rakesh Gupta and is headed by Raj Kumar Chauhan. The committee said documents placed before it allegedly indicate an attempt to manipulate the bench assignment process in the Punjab and Haryana HC. 'The sole objective of placing this matter, suo motu, before the Committee is to uphold the dignity of the legal profession, ensure the maintenance of legal ethics, and discharge the responsibilities entrusted under the law," the notice states. Citing an Indian Express report titled 'Reassigned case: Chief Justice Nagu hints at 'bench shopping', says bar being destroyed', the committee stressed on the seriousness of the issue, noting that there appears to be 'foul play" by advocates representing Roop Bansal, who may have manipulated procedural rules for convenience and gain. 'In India, common people knock on the doors of the court with the help of noble advocates. Here, Roop Bansal tried to break the door of the court with the help of some ingenious-minded advocates. The matters pertaining to M3M and Roop Bansal, pending before the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court, need to be watched carefully. The Bar Council cannot remain idle as a mere spectator. It is duty-bound to protect the dignity and ethics of the profession. The Committee must trace out the rotten apples from the basket before all get spoiled," the notice states. Describing the incident as 'painful and disturbing", the committee observed that certain advocates had allegedly attempted to manipulate bench allocation in a tactful, systematic, and organised manner. The committee said the court is regarded as the temple of justice and that any attempt to subvert it, whether driven by greed or manipulation, must be addressed with utmost seriousness. Drawing a parallel with the Mahabharata, the committee said: 'We are reminded of the Mahabharata, where the silence of wise men in Duryodhana's court led to the disrobing of Draupadi. This serves as a grim reminder that silence and inaction in the face of injustice enable further injustice." 'Legal ethics are not optional. They are sacred. Upholding the dignity of this noble profession requires moral courage, compassion, and an unwavering commitment to truth," it added. Get breaking news, in-depth analysis, and expert perspectives on everything from politics to crime and society. Stay informed with the latest India news only on News18. Download the News18 App to stay updated! tags : punjab and haryana high court view comments First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Time of India
7 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
State Bar Council issues notices to 16 lawyers over ‘bench hunting'
Chandigarh: The Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana (BCPH) has issued notices to 16 lawyers, including two senior advocates, in connection with allegations of "bench hunting" in a high-profile case involving real estate developer Roop Bansal. The council issued the notice following a suo motu inquiry initiated by the privilege committee after media reports and court observations hinted at attempts to manipulate the bench allocation process of the Punjab and Haryana high court. The privilege committee, chaired by Raj Kumar Chauhan, convened on Aug 7 to examine records in CRM-M-19843-2025 (Roop Bansal vs State of Haryana), along with related high court orders and news reports. The committee observed that the allegations, if proven, amount to a grave attack on the dignity and ethics of the legal profession. "Any attempt to subvert the Temple of Justice, motivated by greed or manipulation, must be addressed with utmost seriousness," the order stated, invoking historical and moral analogies from the Mahabharata and quotes from figures like Mahatma Gandhi, B R Ambedkar, Lord Denning, and Justice Brandeis. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Is this legal? Access all TV channels without a subscription! Techno Mag Learn More Undo The order was released late on Friday evening. The lawyers who have been asked to file a response to the issue are J K Singla, Sidharth Bhardwaj, Aditya Aggarwal, Gagandeep Singh, Anmol Chandan, Baljeet Beniwal, Harsh Sharma, Sauhard Singh, Rupender Singh, Ankit Yadav, Ashim Singla, Aakash Sharma, Bindu, APS Shergil, senior advocate Rakesh Nehra, and senior advocate Puneet Bali. All are alleged to have appeared or acted on behalf of Roop Bansal in the matter. The committee noted that records prima facie suggest advocate J K Singla may have played a "key role" in orchestrating the strategy, but stressed that such actions were likely carried out "in an organised manner" with involvement from other "ingenious minds" yet to be identified. The order also called for responses from prominent senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mukul Rohatgi to ensure a comprehensive adjudication. The lawyers have been asked to appear before the privilege committee on Aug 16 at 3 pm, either in person or through counsel, and to submit written replies. The committee likened the alleged practice of bench hunting, seeking a particular bench perceived to be favourable, to "rotten apples in the basket" and stressed the need to remove them before the entire profession's integrity is compromised. It also appealed for information or complaints from advocates or affected persons, to be sent via the committee's email or official WhatsApp number. "The legal profession is not merely a career — it is a calling that demands unshakable integrity, moral courage, and devotion to the cause of justice," the order concluded, warning that ethical breaches by even a few can corrode public faith in the entire system. Importantly, the matter came into the limelight after a complaint was received by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu of the Punjab and Haryana high court, and the matter was de-listed from the bench of Justice Mahabir Singh Sindhu, who reserved its verdict after hearing the matter. The Chief Justice, in its order, hinted at bench hunting by the lawyers in this matter. Prior to referring the matter to Justice Sindhu, several benches recused themselves from hearing. Interestingly, even after taking the matter from Justice Sidhu, several other judges of the HC recused themselves from hearing this case. MSID:: 123204346 413 | Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area. Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Raksha Bandhan wishes , messages and quotes !
Hindustan Times
09-08-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Bar council puts 16 lawyers on notice for bench hunting
The privilege committee of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana has put on notice 16 lawyers, including two senior advocates, of the high court over alleged attempts of 'bench hunting' to obtain a favourable order in an alleged case of corruption involving a Gurugram-based realtor and former special CBI court judge in Haryana. The privilege committee of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana has asked the 16 lawyers to respond by August 16. (Representational photo) The committee sought responses from senior advocate and Congress leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi and former attorney general Mukul Rohatgi, stating their responses are necessary to 'fairly and comprehensively adjudicate the matter in hand'. The committee, chaired by Raj Kumar Chauhan, was constituted on August 4 by BCPH chairman Rakesh Gupta after members of the bar council pointed out that some advocates of the Punjab and Haryana high court were resorting to bench hunting to secure 'favourable orders' from a particular bench or avoiding to appear before another. Bench hunting or forum shopping refers to petitioners managing to get their cases heard by a particular judge or bench to ensure a favourable order. 'This committee is of the prima facie view that there appears to be foul play on the part of certain advocates who appeared on behalf of Roop Bansal, a real estate builder, and it appears these advocates may have manipulated procedural rules for convenience and gain,' the privilege committee observed after going through the record of the case. 'It is painful and disturbing for the committee to discuss here how tactfully, systematically and in an organised manner, some of the advocates made efforts to hunt the bench. From the records, prima facie it appears that JK Singla, advocate, orchestrated the game plan. But it is highly unbelievable, that this can be done singularly, rather it has been done in an organised manner and there might be some big ingenious minded advocates behind the curtains, which has to be unearthed,' it said. The council is the statutory body with 1.5 lakh members across two states and Chandigarh. It has regulatory control over the Bars and regulates entry into the legal profession and also adjudicates complaints against lawyers. It was established under the Advocates Act, 1961, and is headquartered at Chandigarh. The advocates, who have been served notice through Punjab and Haryana High Court Bar Association, are JK Singla, Sidharth Bhardwaj, Aditya Aggarwal, Gagandeep Singh, Anmol Chandan, Baljeet Beniwal, Harsh Sharma, Sauhard Singh, Rupender Singh, Ankit Yadav, Ashim Singla, Aakash Sharma, Bindu, APS Shergil and two senior advocates Rakesh Nehra and Puneet Bali. All of them have been told to respond by August 16. The petition was filed by real estate firm M3M's director Roop Bansal seeking quashing of an FIR filed by the Haryana anti-corruption bureau in April 2023 against himself and others, including former special CBI court judge Sudhir Parmar. The case stems from an April 2023 case, registered against Sudhir Parmar, Roop Bansal, and others under Sections 7, 8, 11 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120-B of IPC for offences relating to a public servant being bribed, a public servant taking undue advantage without consideration from person concerned in proceedings or business transacted by such public servant, criminal misconduct by a public servant and criminal conspiracy. Sudhir Parmar, who was then special CBI judge, Panchkula, was accused of alleged favouritism towards Bansal and others who were accused in FIRs being investigated by the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Enforcement Directorate, pending before his court. Bansal's case was withdrawn by chief justice Sheel Nagu through an administrative decision in May from a judge and assigned it to himself after some 'complaints'. While hearing this petition, the chief justice had orally hinted at possible cases of 'bench hunting' in these proceedings during an open court hearing. However, subsequently, the chief justice also recused from hearing the case. The case is now being heard by the bench of justice Manjari Nehru Kaul. The committee asserted that 'legal ethics are not optional'. 'They are sacred. Upholding the dignity of this noble profession requires moral courage, compassion, and unwavering commitment to truth,' it said, adding to ascertain whether these advocates have indulged at any stage in bench hunting, the notices are being issued to these lawyers.
Indian Express
09-08-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
Bar Council issues notices to 16 lawyers over alleged bench-hunting in Roop Bansal case
The Privilege Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana has initiated proceedings against 16 lawyers, including two senior advocates, over alleged attempts to manipulate the bench assignment process in a high-profile corruption case involving Gurugram-based real estate developer Roop Bansal. In an order dated August 7, 2025, the Committee directed the advocates to appear in person or through counsel on August 16 at 3 pm, along with their replies. The list includes Senior Advocates Rakesh Nehra and Puneet Bali, besides Advocates J.K. Singla, Sidharth Bhardwaj, Aditya Aggarwal, Gagandeep Singh, Anmol Chandan, Baljeet Beniwal, Harsh Sharma, Sauhard Singh, Rupender Singh, Ankit Yadav, Ashim Singla, Aakash Sharma, Ms. Bindu, and APS Shergil. The move follows observations made by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in CRM-M-19843-2025 (Roop Bansal vs State of Haryana), where Chief Justice Sheel Nagu, in the open court, flagged concerns over 'bench shopping' and warned that such conduct was 'destroying the Bar.' The Indian Express had reported that the Bench had asked Bansal's legal team to produce the advocate who filed a fresh plea in the matter 'just to get the case out of a particular Bench.' The Committee, chaired by Raj Kumar Chauhaan, said the matter was taken up suo motu to 'uphold the dignity of the legal profession, ensure the maintenance of legal ethics, and discharge the responsibilities entrusted under law.' It further wrote, 'In the battle of justice and injustice and in between the righteous and wrong, in Mahabharata, the silence of Bhishma and Drona in the Court of Hastinapur, during Draupadi's humiliation, reveals a timeless truth – when those trained in law and morality remain silent in the face of injustice, the law itself collapses.' Citing legal maxims and historical analogies, it likened any attempt to subvert judicial processes to an 'invasion of the Temple of Justice,' comparable to 'the desecration of the Somnath Temple in the 11th century.' From the records, the Committee said it appeared that Advocate J.K. Singla 'orchestrated the game plan' but that it was 'highly unbelievable' such an effort could be carried out alone. 'There might be some big ingenious mind advocates behind the curtains, which has to be unearthed,' it noted, terming the alleged conduct as 'tactful, systematic and in an organized manner.' The order invoked Section 6(c) and (d) of the Advocates Act, 1961, empowering the Bar Council to take action in cases involving professional misconduct. It also acknowledged the 'complexity of tactics such as bench hunting, bar hunting or forum shopping' allegedly adopted by some lawyers and businessmen 'for ulterior motives.' The Committee said it would also seek responses from senior advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mukul Rohatgi 'to fairly and comprehensively adjudicate the matter.' Additionally, it invited information, complaints, or any material from advocates and affected persons via its official email and WhatsApp number. Emphasising that 'legal ethics are not optional, they are sacred,' the order warned that any lawyer who manipulates the judicial process 'for convenience and gain' is 'a menace to society.' Quoting Gandhi, Ambedkar, Roscoe Pound, Lord Denning and Justice Louis Brandeis, the Committee underlined that lawyers are 'custodians of justice' and 'guardians of constitutional morality.' 'The Bar Council cannot sit idle as a mere spectator. It is the duty of the Committee to trace out the rotten apple/apples from the basket, before all get rotten,' the order concluded. Bar Council Secretary Gagandeep Jammu, when contacted, said, 'As Secretary of the Bar Council, I will be forwarding these notices to the advocates concerned on the allegations of bar shopping. If the Bar Council is satisfied with their explanation, it will close the matter, if not, it has the power to suspend or even cancel their licences.' The notice further read, 'This Committee is also of the view that for the fair inquiry and to look into the unethical measures adopted by some of the advocates, let the information/complaints/any kind of material, if any, be taken from the advocates and the affected persons.' The matter will be heard at 3 pm on August 16, at the Bar Council's Chandigarh office.
Time of India
09-08-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
State bar council issues notices to 16 lawyers over alleged ‘bench hunting'
CHANDIGARH: The Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana (BCPH) has issued notices to 16 lawyers, including two senior advocates, in connection with allegations of 'bench hunting' in a high-profile case involving real estate developer Roop Bansal. The council issued the notice following a suo motu inquiry initiated by the Privilege Committee after media reports and court observations hinted at attempts to manipulate the bench allocation process of the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The Privilege Committee, chaired by Raj Kumar Chauhan, convened on August 7 to examine records in CRM-M-19843-2025 (Roop Bansal vs State of Haryana), along with related high court orders and news reports. The committee observed that the allegations, if proven, amount to a grave attack on the dignity and ethics of the legal profession. 'Any attempt to subvert the Temple of Justice, motivated by greed or manipulation, must be addressed with utmost seriousness,' the order stated, invoking historical and moral analogies from the Mahabharata and quotes from figures like Mahatma Gandhi, B.R. Ambedkar, Lord Denning, and Justice Brandeis. The order was released on Friday late evening. The lawyers who have been asked to file a response to the issue are J K Singla, Sidharth Bhardwaj, Aditya Aggarwal, Gagandeep Singh, Anmol Chandan, Baljeet Beniwal, Harsh Sharma, Sauhard Singh, Rupender Singh, Ankit Yadav, Ashim Singla, Aakash Sharma, Bindu, APS Shergil, Senior Advocate Rakesh Nehra, and Senior Advocate Puneet Bali. All are alleged to have appeared or acted on behalf of Roop Bansal in the matter. The committee noted that records prima facie suggest Advocate J K Singla may have played a 'key role' in orchestrating the strategy, but stressed that such actions were likely carried out 'in an organised manner' with involvement from other 'ingenious minds' yet to be identified. The order also called for responses from prominent Senior Advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mukul Rohatgi to ensure a comprehensive adjudication. The lawyers have been asked to appear before the Privilege Committee on August 16 at 3 pm, either in person or through counsel, and to submit written replies. The committee likened the alleged practice of bench hunting—seeking a particular bench perceived to be favourable—to 'rotten apples in the basket' and stressed the need to remove them before the entire profession's integrity is compromised. It also appealed for information or complaints from advocates or affected persons, to be sent via the committee's email or official WhatsApp number. 'The legal profession is not merely a career—it is a calling that demands unshakable integrity, moral courage, and devotion to the cause of justice,' the order concluded, warning that ethical breaches by even a few can corrode public faith in the entire system. Importantly, the matter came into the limelight after a complaint was received by Chief Justice Sheel Nagu of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, and the matter was de-listed from the bench of Justice Mahabir Singh Sandhu, who reserved its verdict after hearing the matter. The Chief Justice, in its order, hinted at bench hunting by the lawyers in this matter. Prior to referring the matter to Justice Sandhu, several benches recused themselves from hearing. Interestingly, even after taking the matter from Justice Sandhu, several other judges of the HC recused themselves from hearing this case. Stay updated with the latest local news from your city on Times of India (TOI). Check upcoming bank holidays , public holidays , and current gold rates and silver prices in your area. Get the latest lifestyle updates on Times of India, along with Raksha Bandhan wishes , messages and quotes !
