Apropos: Mr. Khobragade’s Dubious Quest for Justice
This article deals with some of the key questions regarding Bar-Bench relations in Chandrapur district court arising from the recent FIR registered against some lawyers because of a private criminal complaint.
The facts of the matter are as follows. There was a succession case filed at Ballarpar JMFC court in which the Marriage Certificate of a party was annexed. The lawyer annexed the Marriage Certificate as forwarded by the litigant-client and given that it was issued by the state administration the lawyer did not check the authenticity of the same. In effect, the lawyer presumed that the Marriage Certificate forwarded to him by the client was authentic and he used the same.
Mr. Khobragade, who is a self-declared social worker, and who is in no way connected with the succession case, all of a sudden entered the matter and out of the blue filed a private complaint under section 156 (3) Cr. P.C. challenging the authenticity of the Marriage Certificate. The Hon’ble Judicial Magistrate passed an order directing the police to register FIR against the lawyer in question who then took bail.
Subsequently a revision petition was filed before the Sessions Court, Chandrapur in which the names of several advocates appeared in the Vakalatnama who were assisting the counsel representing the aggrieved lawyer of Ballarpur court. Mr. Khobragade then filed a criminal application under section 379 BNSS alleging that the affidavits filed by the lawyers in the revision petition are false. He alleged that the advocates appearing in revision petition have committed perjury. The Hon’ble Sessions Court issued notice to all the lawyers whose names appeared in the Vakalatnama.
Presently Mr. Khobragade is in a self-congratulatory mode for having precipitated this drama in the name of quest for justice and is busy forwarding posts on social media. However, for our purposes Mr. Khobagade is a person of not much consequence. The matter of his locus will come up in due course.
This is not the first time that a Court in the district has come down against a lawyer in an unreasonable manner. Recently the Chief Judicial Magistrate ordered FIR against a lady lawyer. The FIR was patently flawed and was subsequently quashed by the Hon’ble High Court, Nagpur but by this time the lady lawyer had suffered much mental and physical harassment.
Thus we come to the larger issue of Bar-Bench Relations in the district, and the manner in which the courts are prone to deal with complaints against lawyers. To begin with, we may ask what stopped the Hon’ble JMFC Ballarpur from informing the Ballarpur Bar Association that there was a complaint against one of their member-lawyers? And similarly, what stopped the Hon’ble Sessions Court which is also the Administrative Court of the district, from reaching out to the Chandrapur District Bar Association? Why did the Hon’ble Sessions Court not consider it prudent to at least seek a clarification from the CDBA regarding the complaint lodged against several member-lawyers?
Our courts seem to interpret the adversarial system as one of Bar versus Bench, instead of one in which the lawyers are adversaries to each other. It appears almost as if the courts are waiting for random persons (such as Mr. Khobragade) to file mischievous cases which can be used to inflict pain on the lawyers. The judicial system which is famous for operating at a snail’s pace suddenly picks up steam when it comes to issuing orders and notices against lawyers. Unfortunately, these actions make the courts come across as a colonial system in which the Bench insist on treating lawyers as their subordinates rather than their colleagues. To paraphrase the words of an eminent jurist, ‘it is all about pandering to fragile egos.’ And the business of soothing egos is what feudalism is all about. The transformation of the judicial system will remain a distant dream till the courts let go of this feudal mentality and proffers to treat the Bar as its equal, not a subordinate to be brow-beaten with the heavy hand of law.
Let me end by recounting the words of Hon’ble Justice SharadBobde, CJI who used the telling metaphor of ‘co-parcenaries’ to describe Bar-Bench relations.
The relationship between bar and the bench is special given that by all accounts the bar is the mother of the bench. After all most judges commence their careers at the bar and then join the judiciary. All of us (Bar and the Bench) are more like coparcenaries of an undivided family. Anything detrimental to one of the coparcenary naturally affects the other coparcenary. But, the more important reason for the special bond between the bar and bench is the values and beliefs that unite the two… I must acknowledge that the judiciary has been able to respond to socio-political changes because of the strength and support which it has been able to derive from the Bar. It is our collective responsibility to ensure that the credibility of the Bar is maintained.”
The least that the courts of Chandrapur could do is to extend a modicum of courtesy towards the Bar by informing them of impending complaints against lawyers. Otherwise the lofty words of the CJI will remain floating in the rarefied atmosphere of New Delhi and have no bearing on the everyday practice of district judiciary, which would be yet another misfortune indeed.
- Dr. Kalyan Kumar
(Author practices at Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench & District and Sessions Court, Chandrapur)