'Would Have Chilling Effect On Advocacy': Karnataka High Court Flags Dangerous Trend Of FIRs Against Lawyers Appearing For Opponents

The Karnataka High Court on Tuesday (February 3) flagged the dangerous trend of complainants registering FIRs against advocates who represent their opponents remarking that this would create a chilling effect on the profession of advocacy. 

The court was hearing a lawyer's plea challenging an FIR where he has been arraigned as an accused, including for the offence of Section 69 (Sexual intercourse by employing deceitful means, etc.) BNS. 

When the matter was called, the petitioner's counsel emphasized that there was only one passing allegation against the petitioner that he had filed a Vakalatnama in another matter involving the complainant.

"She (complainant) makes an allegation saying that the first accused had filed petition for dissolution of marriage and in that petition I filed vakalat. I don't even know who this first accused is..don't even know what their relation is. And against me offence of Section 69. I am arrayed as accused no. 6," the counsel said. 

After hearing the petitioner's counsel Justice M Nagaprasanna in his order dictated:

"This is yet another case in the mushrooming of cases being registered by the complainants against the advocates. The only allegation against the advocates are that they are representing accused in several crimes, or if it is a matrimonial case representing husband before matrimonial court" 

The complainant in the present case, the court noted, had alleged cheating, false promise of marriage and other incidental offences against a man and had drawn in the petitioner–an advocate, who did not even represent any person as an accused in the alleged crime. 

"It is therefore this court is time and again directing that police before registration of crime against the advocates unless it projects grievous offence, must hold a peripheral inquiry and then register a crime against an advocate. As the complainants are now developing a recent trend dangerous trend of registering crimes against advocates who are representing their opponents. If this is permitted as observed herein above, will create chaos and have a chilling effect on the profession of advocacy. Therefore there shall be an interim order of stay of all investigation quay petitioner (accused no. 6) till next date of hearing"

The petitioner a lawyer had moved the high court seeking quashing if an FIR against accused persons including the petitioner (arrayed as accused no. 6) for offences under Sections 69,79 (Word, gesture or act intended to insult modesty of a woman) 318(2)(Cheating), 335(Making a false document), 336(3)(forgery), 351(2)(Criminal intimidation), 3(5) (common interim) BNS. In the interim the petitioner had sought stay of investigation. 

The matter is listed on February 19. 

Case title: BELLIAPPA M P v/s STATE OF KARNATAKA and ANR

WP 1510/2026