The Allahabad High Court in the case Pawan Kumar Dubey v. State Of U.P. And 3 Others observed and has directed the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh to call for a police report regarding all fresh and pending applications for a license to practise law.
The bench comprising of Justice Saumitra Dayal Singh and Justice Vinod Diwakar in the case observed and has directed the Government and the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh to issue the necessary directions and to ensure appropriate police report be called from the concerned Police Stations about all pending and fresh applications for issuance of license as is being done or followed for issuance of Passports.
The court in the case observed that such due diligence procedure would ensure that a person who may carry a criminal history and who may conceal that information be prevented from misleading the Bar Council in obtaining a license and the provisional license is being issued pending an adverse police report may be cancelled upon such report being submitted.
In the present case, the petitioner in 2022 filed the complainant against a private respondent before the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh that he had obtained the license to practice law and concealed the fact 14 criminal cases against him, in 4 of which he had been convicted.
The petitioner in the plea argued before the court that though the petitioner has obtained a license to practice law, ‘the respondent stands quite distanced from law.’
The court directed that the disciplinary proceedings be complete within three months.
The court observed that it was ‘alarming’ that a person with a criminal history of fourteen cases was granted a license to practice law.
The court stated that such license if allowed to arise or continue, may cause harm to the society in general and the legal fraternity in particular. Thus, the Advocates Act prohibits admission of such person to practice.
The court observed that the Bar Council should have developed a procedure to ensure that all fresh applications received for the grant of license are subjected to police verification procedure in a time-bound manner and all the applicants who may be facing criminal charges and/or may have been convicted are bound to inform the Bar Council at the stage of making their applications as to the pendency of such cases and or the existence of any order of conviction. Thus, it such material particulars are not disclosed by an applicant, his application may be rejected at the threshold.
The said court was surprised that the Bar Council had not developed any such procedure to date to enforce its laws. The counsel, Advocate Shri Suresh Chandra Dwivedi appeared for the petitioner.
The counsel, Advocate Shri Arimardan Singh Rajput, Additional Chief Standing Counsel for State-represented the respondents. The counsel, Shri Ashok Kumar Tiwari appeared for the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh.
