The Supreme Court reprimanded the Haryana Advocate Board and said that 'Room of Attorneys became the center of property traders

In a sharp remark on Tuesday, the Supreme Court condemned the Bar Councils’ “shameful actions”, “wrong behavior” and “large -scale corruption” in Punjab and Haryana. Justice Suryakant and N. The Bank of Kotishwar Singh did not allow a lack of words in his criticism, saying that the bar councils greatly obscured the reputation of the legal profession. The court warned that, if necessary, it would make up a special investigative team (Sit) to investigate the allegations and investigate the financial transactions of bar bodies, especially in Haryana. The bank said: “These state bars have become the office of advocates and rooms of property traders and corruption. They are involved in all kinds of embarrassment activities, which led to a shame of the profession.” The remarks of the court came during the trial of the petition of an advocate, who disputed his disqualification by contesting the Karnal Bar Association election. The bank announced to the bar bodies in question and senior lawyer RS ​​took the help of Ceema. Ceema had the task of representing the names of such prestigious senior advocates, which could temporarily handle the post within the bar to ensure proper functioning. The case considered is related to Advocate Sandeep Chaudhary, who is disqualified from contesting the district bar election. Chaudhary argued that his disqualification violated his rights as an advocate. Senior lawyer Narendra Hooda, who represented Chaudhary, claimed that the election officer was sitting outside the polling station and that other candidates declared without any polling station without any polling station. Chaudhary’s disqualification stems from a continued investigation into the allegations of money abuse. Although the ball banned Council of India disqualification, the Punjab and Haryana High Court rejected the relief on February 27 and allowed the election to continue. The next day, a new election officer declared four candidates unopposed. Justice Suryakant, although he strongly criticized the state bar councils, especially Haryana State Bar Council, they called “Shameful Association”. He suggested that the allegations against Chaudhary be valid and express no doubt about the involvement of the office bearers in corruption and misconduct. The judge noted: “These district bar associations are full of corruption and misconduct. The Haryana government showed parties to them and their rooms essentially became a meeting place for property traders.” The Supreme Court drafted the next trial of the case on April 15 and Ceema was asked to proposes temporary officials of a group of senior advocates to keep the bodies away from further disputes. Share this story -tags