Read Time: 06 minutes
The bench concluded that the reasons were genuine, and since Kumar was not registered with the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, the court did not have jurisdiction to take action against him
The Bombay High Court has recently asked the State Bar Council not to take action against a lawyer whose Advocate ID had expired and who was not enrolled on the rolls of the State Bar Council.
‘So far as the advocate Avnendra Kumar is concerned, a copy of ‘Certificate of Practice’ of Bar Council of India duly indicating that he is enrolled as an Advocate under the Advocates Act, 1961 with SBC Enrollment No. UP/2608/2015 dated 21/05/2016 is produced. The ‘Certificate of Practice’ subsists and on instructions learned counsel Abdul Karim Pathan submits that the ‘Certificate of Practice’ is not suspended,” the order reads.
The single judge bench of Justice MS Karnik was hearing a bail application filed by one Moinoddin Golden Aminoddin Goldar who was booked in a cheating case.
Earlier, the bail plea was placed before Justice PK Chavan wherein Advocate Avnendra Kumar, holding for Advocate A. Karim Pathan, requested an adjournment.
Kumar disclosed to the court that he is not currently registered with the Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa. However, he mentioned that he has applied for the transfer of his membership from the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh to the Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa.
However, Kumar failed to provide any evidence of his application for membership with the Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa but displayed his expired Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh Identity Card, which was valid until December 31, 2022.
The bench of Justice PK Chavan had asked the state bar council to take appropriate action against the lawyer. The bail application was then placed before the bench of Justice MS Karnik
Advocate Avendra Kumar appeared before the court and explained that due to his father's death in November 2021 and personal tragedies in 2022, he was unable to renew his ID card in Uttar Pradesh. Kumar also made an unconditional apology to the court.
The bench concluded that the reasons were genuine, and since Kumar was not registered with the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, the court did not have jurisdiction to take action against him.
“In this view of the matter, in my opinion, the matter need not be precipitated any further. Learned counsel for the Bar Council of Maharashtra & Goa submitted that as Advocate Avnendra Kumar is not registered with the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa, it is not within their jurisdiction to take any action against him. In any case the Certificate of Practice issued by the Bar Council of India subsists, which could not be produced before the co[1]ordinate bench, hence any further action is now not necessary,” the order reads.
Case title: Moinuddin Golder vs State of Maharashtra
Please Login or Register
