'Don't Destroy Our Trust In Bar, We Trust You As Our Own Children' : Supreme Court Reprimands Lawyers For Suppression Of Facts

Remarking that the trust of the Court should not be destroyed by the Bar, the Supreme Court today imposed an exemplary cost of Rs 10,000 on each appellant in a matter for suppression of facts. 

Before a bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Vipul M Pancholi, an advocate made a mention for the listing of an Interlocutory Application(IA), which the Court said it would list. However, later, the Court was informed that a review petition is pending in this matter. 

When a Senior Advocate appeared in this matter, Justice Narasimha asked why the fact that the IA was filed in a matter where a review was pending was suppressed from the Court. The judge remarked that the Court, as an institution, puts a lot of blind trust in the Bar that such practices would not be followed. 

"Tell us, review is filed. We saw the review petition, main judgment and in the last portion, it was my view that perhaps it may be modified. This was after my brother was not a part of the proceedings. That review was heard and a decision was to be taken but where is the question of the interlocutory application? Somebody innocently comes and says there is an IA filed and we list that IA. It's okay we trust the Bar and list that IA. But how can an IA be filed knowing fully well that a review is pending? We are talking very serious view of this IA. The person innocously and innocently comes and says as if not even indicating to us that before us is the review. We are taking a very serious view of the matter," Justice Narasimha remarked.

Justice Narasimha also questioned the mentioning advocate and said: "Did you mention to me that a review is pending before us? When you mention to us there is an IA listed, we trust you, we trust you so much that you are a part of us. First of all, how can you file an IA? How is the IA maintainable when simultaneously you file a review petition? When you know the review is listed before us, you file an interlocutory application with various directions. What is the practice of this court that in a matter in which review is pending, you file an interlocutory application?"

Senior Advocate clarified that he will withdraw the review petition. He also apologised.

But Justice Narasimha said that the fact that IA was filed was highly improper and imposed a cost of Rs. 1 lakh on each Applicant. However, the Court expressed great concern over the use of such practices. "What you are going to do by this practice is to destroy our trust in the Bar. If you destroy our trust, what remains in the Bar? We are bothered about how much we trust you. In your practice, if somebody comes and tells you that a review is pending, will you say file an IA and don't tell the Court?...Don't destroy this Court. We are harsh for the reason that we want to protect this institution. We will grant them bail or reserve the order but the concern is to only to protect you as a member of the Bar... We trust you as our own children."