Shambu Ram Yadav v Hanuman Das Khatry
Rule established
Disciplinary proceedings against advocates are quasi-judicial; principles of natural justice including opportunity of hearing must be strictly followed.
Facts
- An advocate was found guilty of professional misconduct by the disciplinary committee without being given adequate opportunity to present their defence. The advocate challenged the order as violative of natural justice.
Issue
- Whether disciplinary proceedings under the Advocates Act are quasi-judicial in nature and must comply with principles of natural justice.
Held
- The Supreme Court held that disciplinary proceedings against advocates are quasi-judicial. The disciplinary committee must: (1) frame specific charges, (2) give reasonable notice, (3) allow the advocate full opportunity to defend, (4) consider evidence on record, and (5) provide reasoned orders. Failure to comply vitiates the proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi
The Supreme Court held that disciplinary proceedings against advocates are quasi-judicial. The disciplinary committee must: (1) frame specific charges, (2) give reasonable notice, (3) allow the advocate full opportunity to defend, (4) consider evidence on record, and (5) provide reasoned orders. Failure to comply vitiates the proceedings.
How to use it in an exam
Source
Source: (2001) 6 Supreme Court Cases 1
This is an educational summary, not the judgment itself. Cite the reported version in professional or academic work.