Advocate Gunratan Sadavarte Approaches Bombay High Court After Bar Council Initiates Disciplinary Proceedings For 'Malicious' Statements In Media

The list of alleged misdemeanours includes “malicious” and “obnoxious” statements to the media during the Maratha Reservation and Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (MSRTC) employee-strike hearings, and wearing a black coat with a band at public events in violation of the advocates ethics code.

However, Sadavarte has cited the police’s ‘C’ summary report in FIR and dismissal of an earlier complaint, while praying for quashing the proceedings under section 35 of the Advocates Act 1961.

A division bench of Justice Gautam Patel and Justice Neela Gokhale agreed to list the matter after it was mentioned by Sadavarte on Friday.

On February 7, 2023 the Bar Council of Maharashtra and Goa issued a notice to Sadavarte informing him about the disciplinary proceedings to enquire into the complaints against him and directed him to remain present for a hearing on February 24, 2023.

The Disciplinary Committee comprising Chairman Gajanan Chavan, Advocates Kaiser Ansari and Sangram Desai is investigating the two complaints filed by Advocate Sushil Manchekar, former president of the Pimpri Court Bar Association, and one RTI activist Nitin Yadav.

The allegations are as follows-

1. On October 9, 2020 during a debate on channel News 18 he made defamatory statements against descendants of Shivaji Maharaj- MPs Udayanraje Bhosale and MP Samblaji Raje Chhatrapati. Remarks were malicious and irresponsible.
2. From October- April 2021, “obnoxious” statements were made during the MSRTC strikes. Sadavarte consciously misled protestors without any due diligence causing suicides of many protestors.
3. Social media video of underage daughter driving a car.
4. Wearing a band in public spaces.

Sadavarte has contended that a similar complaint by Maratha activists was earlier dismissed, therefore the present enquiry would amount to double jeopardy.

The complaints have been filed to make “political bosses happy” as the petitioner had challenged the Maratha reservation, which was struck down by the Supreme Court, according to the petitioner. 

Moreover, neither was the entire corum of the disciplinary committee present for the hearing, nor was the hearing incamera as per rule 7.33, he said.

Therefore, Sadavarte has sought quashing of the notice and the proceedings initiated against him.