sardul singh vs pritam singh
facts of the case.
As per your query concerned!
Sardul Singh vs. Pritam Singh & Anr. (1999)
The facts of the case are that;
1. On 29.11.1984 the Bar Council of Delhi held Sri Pritam Singh the first respondent guilty of professional misconduct and suspended him from practice for three years.
2. The first respondent filed an appeal in this court and obtained a stay of the said order of the Bar Council of Delhi.
3. The appeal preferred by the first respondent before the Bar Council of India was dismissed on 13.12.1986 and a notification was issued on 22.1.1987
4. After the suspension, the first respondent was continued to practise in violation of the order of the Bar Council of India and even after the above notification and that he thereby committed fresh misconduct which was liable to be punished.
5. The first respondent filed a reply before the Bar Council of Delhi and thereafter, an order was passed on 02.05.1990 by the Bar Council of Delhi holding the respondent guilty of professional is conduct since he continued to practise during the period of suspension by another name "P.S. Madan" instead of "Pritam Singh".
6. The Delhi Bar Council held him guilty states was that the first respondent had concealed material facts at the time of his enrolment, regarding an earlier conviction by a criminal court.
7. It appeared, the first respondent was convicted for an offence under Narcotics Drugs Act and was sentenced to six months imprisonment. He was earlier in service and was compulsorily retired. The Delhi Bar Council noticed that the first respondent was convicted by the Court but the enrolment form filled by the first respondent did not disclose anything.
Hope it clarifies the issues
Regards
Minakshi Bindhani
