Can't Presume Bar Association Is Unaware Of Advocates Allegedly Misleading Court To Defreeze Bank Accounts: Kerala High Court

While hearing a plea pertaining to alleged misconduct by advocates in Bank Account Defreezing Cases, the Kerala High Court remarked that it cannot be presumed that the Kerala High Court Advocates' Association has no information about its members who allegedly misused their position as an advocate and misled the court in such cases. This, after the bar body in its affidavit stated that at present it has no information about such members. The court further said that it "expected" the KHCAA to "at least conduct a basic enquiry" to identify the individuals and not to leave it to the Court to make a reference of the names of such persons for cancellation of their membership and for informing the Bar Council of India of such acts. A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Soumen Sen and Justice Syam Kumar V.M was considering a review petition filed by the Kerala High Court Advocates' Association (KHCAA) in suo motu judicial practice and procedure proceedings where it had earlier directed that no writ petition or similar plea seeking defreezing of bank accounts shall be entertained unless the Station House Officer (SHO) concerned is made a party respondent.While considering the Review Petition, the Court has earlier directed the KHCAA to disclose steps taken against advocates accused of misleading the Court and making false representations in de-freezing cases. The KHCAA in its said that it is strictly following its bylaws and regulations. It however said that in absence of any information officially received from the High Court regarding any instance in which its member advocate has misused their power and made false representations in relation to matters before the High Court, the Association is "unable at this stage to submit a report regarding any action taken". To this submission the court said:"However, it cannot be denied that the advocates responsible for misleading the Court, which may amount to an act of contempt, are to be dealt with in accordance with law at an appropriate stage if so found liable. Steps in the said regard cannot be delayed. If the Bar Association is not aware of the advocates who have allegedly misused their position as an advocate, this Court shall furnish particulars of the matters in which such advocates have misused their power and had thus interfered with the administration of justice.The direction to identify the Advocates responsible has proceeded on the assumption that, when the Association has filed an application urging that the identification by the SHO, independent of identification by the advocate in terms of Rule 76 of the Rules of the High Court of Kerala, 1971, be reviewed, the Association must at least be aware of the members responsible for such acts which had prompted this Court to issue such an order. We expected the Bar Association to at least conduct a basic enquiry in this regard to identify the individuals and not to leave it to the Court to make a reference of the names of such persons for cancellation of their membership and for informing the Bar Council of India of such acts. We cannot presume that the Bar Association is unaware of such facts; otherwise, no such application for review would have been filed". The bench thus said that it will also be open to the court concerned before "which the malpractice is revealed" to refer the matter for appropriate action to the Secretary of the Bar Council who shall treat the communication as a complaint and "take appropriate action in accordance with law". The court further directed that it would be open for the SHO, on getting an intimation from the Government Pleader to enquire about the identity and other relevant credentials of the writ petitioner whose account had is stated to have been frozen. It said that the report to be submitted to the Public Prosecutor/ Government Pleader must include details of such enquiry carried out by the SHO concerned. The Court also took note of the earlier direction by the Single Judge to underline that clandestine attempts had been made to unfreeze the bank accounts. "If the Court feels that for the purpose of proper disposal of the writ petition seeking unfreezing of the bank account preferred by the petitioner, the identity of the petitioner as well as his other credentials are also required to be gone into, it is open to the court to seek such details especially since clandestine attempts had been made to unfreeze the bank accounts which have been very articulately expressed by Justice M.A. Abdul Hakim in His Lordship's Order dated 10th December 2025 in W.P. (C) No. 43123 of 2025 as well as in the order dated 12.12.2025 in W.P. (C) No. 43642 of 2025," the court said. The court further said that it had proceeded on the basis that the bar association would ascertain whether the advocates appearing in the matters in which such defreezing orders were obtained, "are members of the Kerala High Court Advocates' Association".It however noted that it...

Can't Presume Bar Association Is Unaware Of Advocates Allegedly Misleading Court To Defreeze Bank Accounts: Kerala High Court

Anamika MJ

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Can't Presume Bar Association Is Unaware Of Advocates Allegedly Misleading Court To Defreeze Bank Accounts: Kerala High Court

Anamika MJ

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers