Bar Council Ethics Violations

[Your Address] [City, State, PIN Code] [Date] ,To, Law Commission The Chairpersonsion of India, Government of India, New Delhi - * Subject: Reminder: Non-Compliance by the Bar Council of India Despite Your Directive Respected Chairperson, This is a follow-up to my earlier submissions to the Law Commission dated [insert date of ECHO *] and [insert date of ECHO *], as well as your esteemed directive to the Bar Council of India (BCI) to address the systemic issues raised therein. Despite the Law Commission’s authoritative intervention, the BCI has failed to take any meaningful action in response to the concerns highlighted. Furthermore, my RTI applications seeking transparency regarding the Bar Councils’ track records of disciplinary actions have been either ignored or unjustly denied. For instance, the Bar Council of Gujarat (BCG) refused to disclose its disciplinary track record, resorting to vague justifications, despite my request being limited to general transparency and not involving personal information. Similarly, the BCI has failed to comment on serious ethical lapses brought to light through my experiments and observations on legal forums. This lack of accountability emboldens advocates to misuse their professional standing, knowing they are shielded from consequences by the Bar Council’s inaction. The systemic failures of Bar Councils to act decisively undermine the legal profession's credibility and perpetuate the exploitation of the judicial process by unethical practices. Case Example: CS CCC/*/* (Small Cause Court, Ahmedabad) A glaring example of these systemic issues is Case No. */*, which has been pending since * at the Small Cause Court, Bhadra, Ahmedabad. The facts are as follows: The tenant presented a time-barred, unregistered sale agreement on plain paper (from *) as primary evidence, despite its obvious legal invalidity. To bolster this baseless claim, repair bills were produced as secondary evidence, alleging ownership of the property. The landlord’s advocate failed to challenge the admissibility of these documents, enabling the tenant to secure interim relief (IR). Over * adjournments in seven years have caused significant financial and emotional distress to the landlord, while the tenant continues to exploit the judicial process. This case underscores the need for reforms to ensure strict scrutiny of documents presented in court and accountability for advocates advancing legally unenforceable claims. Broader Implications This case is not an isolated incident but reflects a nationwide issue where Bar Councils fail to act decisively, leading to: Delays that Erode Justice: Adjournments are frequently misused to prolong litigation and harass genuine claimants. Acceptance of Fabricated Evidence: Courts often admit unverified documents, allowing frivolous claims to proceed unchecked. Unethical Practices by Advocates: Advocates frequently fail to uphold their ethical duties, presenting baseless claims or neglecting their client’s interests. While criminal proceedings may be initiated under IPC Section * against litigants presenting forged documents, the Bar Councils rarely initiate disciplinary or criminal actions against advocates engaging in similar fraudulent behavior. For instance, even in cases where complaints have been filed with the Bar Council (e.g., the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu), advocates have escaped accountability despite clear ethical violations. Proposal for Reform The repeated failure of Bar Councils to ensure accountability necessitates a fundamental shift in how such matters are handled. I propose the following: Curtail the Powers of Bar Councils: Transfer the authority to handle disciplinary cases against advocates to normal courts or open courts, where matters can be decided transparently and impartially. Establish Specialized Tribunals: Create specialized tribunals with retired judges and legal ethics experts to adjudicate cases of professional misconduct. Dual Accountability Mechanism: Retain Bar Councils for handling minor complaints while empowering courts or tribunals to address serious offenses like fraud, forgery, or gross ethical violations. While concerns about judicial overload may arise, this proposal will reduce frivolous cases in the long run by discouraging unethical practices and restoring public faith in the judiciary. Recommendations for Immediate Action I respectfully request the Law Commission to: Reinforce Compliance: Issue a strong reminder to the BCI to respond to your directive immediately, with a copy of their report submitted to your office for evaluation. Investigate Non-Transparency under RTI: Recommend an inquiry into the refusal of Bar Councils to disclose information under RTI and ensure compliance with Section * of the RTI Act regarding proactive disclosure of disciplinary actions. Recommend Systemic Reforms: Mandate due diligence guidelines for advocates drafting legal notices to ensure accountability and prevent misuse. Establish independent oversight bodies within Bar Councils to handle complaints against advocates effectively. Introduce annual reporting requirements for Bar Councils on complaints, investigations, and actions taken. Launch public awareness campaigns to educate citizens on their rights and the recourse available against baseless legal notices. Closing Remarks The judiciary has laid the groundwork for reform through its observations in landmark cases, but the Bar Councils' continued inaction perpetuates systemic failures. The intervention of the Law Commission is crucial to bridge this accountability gap and to reaffirm the integrity of India’s legal system. I remain committed to assisting in this cause and humbly request a response regarding the steps being considered by your esteemed office. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Yours sincerely, Bharat Khatwani *, Jawahar Colony, Sardarnagar Ahmedabad * ****k8@yahoo.com

I liked your above suggestions.Please give refined draft. I will enter dates manually after verifying my records.