After unearthing a fraud played upon the court by a group of litigants who had filed multiple anticipatory bail applications at the same time, the Madras High Court on Tuesday laid down new procedures requiring the advocates-on-record to submit their photographs, for scanning by the Registry, while filing cases.
Justice S. Vaidyanathan ordered that if the anticipatory bail applications were filed in petition format, the advocate-on-record should sign in all the pages of the petition, and if the anticipatory bail petitions were filed in the affidavit format, the person who is attesting the affidavit shall sign in all the pages.
“In either case, the name of the advocate/attesting person should be written/affixed in capital letters mentioning his place of qualification, enrolment number and cell phone number. The photograph of the advocates-on-record and that of the advocate, who attests the vakalat, shall form part of the vakalat and the registry shall scan the vakalat so filed.
“The advocate-on-record and the advocate who attests the vakalatnama (a document authorising a lawyer to appear on behalf of his client) shall produce copies of the enrolment certificate, Bar Council identity card and present residential or official address as proof. The vakalat shall contain the address together with the e-mail address and cell number. This will reduce malpractice and eradicate fake advocates. For getting change of vakalat, the consent of the counsel-on-record is duly required. Wherever the party is unable to get change of vakalat, the new counsel should file the vakalat along with necessary documents, mentioned supra along with affidavit and petition of the party,” the judge ordered.
Mr. Justice Vaidyanathan made it clear that all Courts and tribunals in the State shall have the power to demand identity cards, enrolment certificates and address proof of advocates if any doubt arises and even direct them to produce photostat copies of the same and refer them to the respective Bar Council for verification.
Expressing concern over proliferation of fake advocates, he suggested that the Bar Council of India could amend the All India Bar Council Examination Rules of 2010, and if required, the Advocates Act of 1961 too to allow enrolment and practise of newly enrolled advocates only after passing of the Bar Council exams.
The orders were passed after finding that a family facing a dowry harassment case had filed two different anticipatory bail applications through different lawyers at the same time in its desperation to obtain favourable orders. Disapproving of such practice, the judge cancelled the advance bail granted to it in its second petition.
