can an advocate be prosecuted???

Mr khurana your second advice is only to the point.

An advocate is not almighty that he can not be prosecuted. Yes if he feels injutice move higher court for relief.

If this kind of practice not barred or there some rules not made in favor of lawyers, like a lawyer can not be prosecuted without pre sanction of Bar Counsil or like other authority, than in future there ll come flood of this type of cases.

Don't you think so my learned friends??

Even if the Complaint is given by Y accusing a lawyer, the Police will only inquire with him and find out the veracity of the Complaint. It is upto the Police to include the name of the lawyer concerned or not. The lawyer is not the author of the Pronote, in which case, he has only issued the legal notice based upon the instructions of his client, which is what all our community day in and day out do in our professional work. Upon receiving the notice, Y is obliged to immediately react to the notice with a proper reply denying the allegation and denying the very execution of the pronote itself. In the absence of any such preliminary denial, no Police will prosecute a lawyer, without any basis. Police is generally held responsible for prosecuting a lawyer, who discharges his duty towards the client. Police should file a Charge Sheet against the accused who are conclusively held responsible based upon the investigation. I think we don't mix up with the intention of a lawyer  and debate whether he can be prosecuted or not by the police, since it differs from case to case, based upon the investigation. It is needless to say that a lawyer who acts intentionally or aids the fabrication of pronote involving Y is not spared from the clutches of law.

No one Advocate cannot be prosecuted for filing a case agasinst some 3rd party on behalf of his client -the reason is simple here Advocate is just an agent of his client and what he has done is with utmost oggd faith.Hence only principal is liable.

No,since Advocate is mere an agent of his client and here in this case the Advocate has done his duty with utmost good faith.Hence for the act of the principal,the Agent caanot be made liable.

No Advocate caanot be prosecuted in this case because of the simple reason that here the advocate done his duty as an agent with utmost care and good faith.

I am of the view that we have to make a distinction between two distict matters that is an advocate pleading for his client knowinh his guilt as revealed to him, but that is not to say that the advocate has to fabricate himself false documents and file it in the court which would bind him for criminal liability as no one is immune from criminal acts and above the law.

There is constitutional amesty to few high ranking persons from arrest and all other persons have to face due process of law. Advocate is just an agent of the party and he is more liable than party. Since his client can always claim he does not know law while the advocate is supposed to know it.

Those suggesting that the advocate is above law does not any  relevancy in real practice and even in theory.

it is clear that utmost one party to a suit is false. If this kind of practice let be done.Than it would a weapon to the opposite party, he may falsely implicate a lawyer saying that he was also involved in fabrication despite his innocence. And we know well the indian police how it be managed! and more the police is not omniscient as well. 

Now a days some of our lawyer community suggests or instigates his client to do complaints or file criminal proceedings against a successful lawyer to do down him.

In this situation a how can he practice fearlessly???

What ld go wrong if some rules framed in favor of lawyers such as Judiacial officer's protection act?

Even in notary Act there is a provision that if a notary do crime during performing his official duties he can't be arrested by police without previous sanction of Govt.

In judicial proceedings lawyers and the police are always be in confronting position. The police has inflammation from lawyers. Police makes cases and lawyers dash them completely, It's a relation resembling to Snake and Weasel...

Mr Ravikant soni

Your question is regarding criminal conspiracy of an advocate under following sections. If the allegation of complainant is that forgery has taken place with the help of advocate then matter needs investigation by police. If the complainant says the forged document made by the client is used by advocate conspiringly to tarnish his image. Then following questions arises.

1. Whether advocate knows the genuine signature of his client's opponent?

2. Whether advocate with such knowledge of forgery has used the document?

If for both questions, any prima facie proof is there, then investigation is needed.

Read the allegations made in the complaint, if it discloses any offence as alleged on the part of advocate then investigation is needed.

NOTE:- The offence of forgery is complete, once signature is forged, subsequently it is used by advocate under the instructions of his client does not transfer the offence to the advocate unless it is done under his instructions and advice.

If the facts stated in complaint to police is regarding use of forged document in court, then the complaint cannot be entertained by police directly unless the court presiding officer makes complaint after enquiry under section: 340 crpc.

If the facts stated to police is regarding making of forgery under the advice and conspiracy of lawyer, after reading the content of the complaint you may file writ seeking quashing of FIR.

FIND OUT WHETHER ALLEGATIONS IN COMPLAINT SHOWS NECESSARY INGREDIENTS OF THE BELOW SECTIONS.

467. Forgery of valuable security, will, etc

Whoever forges a document which purports to be a valuable security or a will, or an authority to adopt a son, or which purports to give authority to any person to make or transfer any valuable security, or to receive the principal, interest or dividends thereon, or to receive or deliver any money, movable property, or valuable security, or any document purporting to be an acquittance or receipt acknowledging the payment of money, or an acquittance or receipt for the delivery of any movable property or valuable security, shall be punished with 152[imprisonment for life], or with imprisonment of either descripttion for a term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

468. Forgery for purpose of cheating

Whoever commits forgery, intending that the document forged shall be used for the purpose of cheating, shall be punished with imprisonment of either descripttion for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

471. Using as genuine a forged document

Whoever fraudulently or dishonestly uses as genuine any document which he knows or has reason to believe to be a forged document, shall be punished in the same manner as if he had forged such document.