‘Transfer judges from courts where kin practise’

The Bar Council of India today released a long list of relatives of judges practising in the same court and asked the Chief Justice of India...

The Bar Council of India today released a long list of relatives of judges practising in the same court and asked the Chief Justice of India to ‘‘transfer these judges’’ failing which the Bar would take action against the relatives. This, the council says, is a bid to check the ‘‘unfair means’’ in the wake of recent corruption cases in the judiciary.

The list includes the names of 18 judges of the Delhi High Court, five of the Bombay High Court and seven from the Rajasthan High Court. The Bar Council says that all the 17 elected State Bar Councils across the country were asked to submit names on May 8 and they are in the process of receiving other such lists.

Hammering home the Rule 6 of the Bar council of India which bars any advocate from appearing before a court or tribunal where a relative is a member, Adish C Aggarwala, vice-chairman, Bar Council of India, said: ‘‘When there is a rule outlining professional ethics, it is not adhered to.’’

Story continues below this ad

According to Rule 6, Part vi, Chapter ii of BCI rules,‘‘any advocate shall not enter appearance, act, plead or practise in anyway before a court, tribunal or authority mentioned in section 30 of the Act, if the sole or any member thereof is related to the advocate as father, grandfather, son, grandson, uncle, brother, nephew, first cousin, husband, wife, mother, daughter, sister, aunt, niece, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, brother-in-law, daughter-in-law or sister-in-law.

‘‘For the purpose of this rule, court shall mean a court, bench or tribunal in which above-mentioned relation of the advocate is a judge, member or a presiding officer.’’

Most of the judges listed by the Delhi High Court Bar Association have more than one relative practising in the High Court, some as many as three. Also on the list are two Supreme Court judges, an MRTP member and a registrar. (see list).

Terming it as a violation of the Advocates Act, 1961 and the rules framed under it, the Bar Council has lashed out against the practice of ‘‘uncle judges.’’ ‘‘This is not a sudden decision,’’ says Kailash Chand Mittal, chairman of Bar Council of Delhi.

Story continues below this ad

‘‘There have been allegations that sons and daughters of judges who have barely put in a year or two of practice are filing returns of few crores. How do you explain this?’’

However, the simmering tension among lawyers seems to have precipitated the action. When the Delhi High Court last framed a rule whereby sons and daughters of judges would get the seniority of their fathers and thus preference over others in the alottment of chambers, this was met by loud protests from not only the Bar Association but also the Delhi State Bar Council. These alottments have been subsequently held back by the Court.