The Delhi High Court has flagged assigning of two legal-aid advocates to the same accused in a bail matter, observing that such an arrangement results in “double expenditure on the exchequer.”

Justice Girish Kathpalia made the observation while dealing with a bail plea concerning a foreign national, Desalegn Atnafu Abeba, in relation to a case registered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

A fresh application was filed by the accused seeking modification of an earlier bail order, seeking reduction of the surety bond amount.

The Court noted that the accused was initially represented by a private counsel and was subsequently assigned two legal-aid lawyers for the present proceedings.

It observed that the first legal-aid lawyer, who had drafted the application from jail, was completely unaware of an earlier order dated July 27. As a result, it noted that the legal-aid counsel appearing before the Court had no option but to stand in Court.

“This is yet another case where it appears that on account of two different legal aid advocates for one person, there is complete lack of communication,” the Court observed.

It said: “As repeatedly pointed out, engaging two legal aid advocates for same person is double expenditure on exchequer.”

It directed that a copy of the order be sent to the Registrar General of the High Court for being placed before the committee dealing with the Delhi High Court Legal Services Committee (DHCLSC).

On the merits of the application, the Court noted that the accused had earlier filed an application seeking modification of the bail order but the same was withdrawn after part submissions by his erstwhile private counsel.

The fresh application was subsequently filed by the legal-aid counsel seeking modification of the same bail order and reduction of the surety bond amount.

Justice Kathpalia found no reason to modify the earlier bail order and dismissed the application.

Title: DESALEGN ATNAFU ABEBA v. NCB

Click here to read order