Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Disciplinary Committee of the Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court has upheld the maintainability of a complaint against three senior advocates, Mian Abdul Qayoom, Nazir Ahmad Ronga, and Ghulam Nabi Thoker alias Shaheen. The complaint accuses the advocates of promoting anti-national sentiments and engaging in secessionist activities while holding prominent positions in the High Court Bar Association, Kashmir.

The committee, comprising Justice Rajnesh Oswal, Justice Sanjay Dhar, and Justice Rahul Bharti, dismissed the preliminary objections raised by the advocates and affirmed its jurisdiction to hear the complaint. “We are of the considered view that the Disciplinary Committee is competent ot deal with, hear and adjudicate the present complaint and the same is held to be fully maintainable,” the judges noted.

The complaint, lodged on October 31, 2022, by Achal Sethi, Secretary to the Government, Department of Law, Justice, and Parliamentary Affairs, alleged that the three advocates actively encouraged fellow lawyers to adopt anti-national views, indulged in secessionist activities, and orchestrated strikes and shutdowns in Kashmir.

The advocates had challenged the competence of the Disciplinary Committee, arguing that the complaint had not been properly verified and that the previous Disciplinary Committee had refused to entertain the matter. The advocates further claimed that the Disciplinary Committee lacked the authority to proceed under the Advocates Act of 1961, as they were enrolled under the Jammu and Kashmir Legal Practitioners Act of 1977. However, the Committee rejected these objections, stating: “This Disciplinary Committee, constituted by the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh, through its Full Court decision, in its vested authority and jurisdiction under the Act of 1961, cannot self-erase its own status based on the respondents' objections.” The Committee further observed that the respondents could seek appropriate legal remedies elsewhere but not before the Disciplinary Committee.

The committee further stated that “Under the Act of 1961, a Government is equally entitled to file a complaint in respect of an alleged misconduct on the part of an advocate in respect of his/her conduct falling within the meaning of professional misconduct' or "other misconduct' in terms of section 35 of the Act of 1961.”

The Committee also addressed the issue of the complaint's verification, allowing the complainant 30 days to rectify the defect. The Committee emphasised that technical defects should not hinder substantive proceedings, particularly in a case involving serious allegations.

The Committee concluded that while it did not assess the merits of the allegations, there was a prima facie case for the proceedings to continue.

The matter has been scheduled for further hearings on September 21, 2024.

 

Case Name: Secretary to the Government, Department of Law, Justice, and Parliamentary Affairs vs. Mian Abdul Qayoom, Nazir Ahmad Ronga, and Ghulam Nabi Thoker alias Shaheen, Advocates