CWP-32178-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT Jagmal Singh Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana and others CORAM: Present: GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. 1. Petitioner – P-15) passed by the Enrolment Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana vide which license issued to him to practice as an Advocate has been suspended and he has been dir well as his identity 2. As per the case of the petitioner, Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana No.P/159/2006 also held various positions in the local Bar Associations including the post of (O&M) ( 1 ) IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES AT CHANDIGARH CWP Date of Decision: Jagmal Singh Mandhan Versus Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE RAMESH KUMARI Mr. Hemant Bassi, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Sanyam Malhotra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. R.S.Randhawa, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Rahish Pahwa and Ms. Tarranum Madan, Advocates, for respondent No.1. GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J. – Jagmal Singh Mandhan assails order dated 15) passed by the Enrolment Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab & vide which license issued to him to practice as an Advocate has been suspended and he has been directed to surrender his enrolment certificate as his identity card. As per the case of the petitioner, he was enrolled as an Advocate with Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana in the year 2006 vide Enrolment No.P/159/2006 and has been practicing at District Courts, Karnal also held various positions in the local Bar Associations including the post of FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH WP-32178-2025 (O&M) ate of Decision:19.02.2026 …Petitioner …Respondents HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL RAMESH KUMARI , Senior Advocate, assisted by , Advocate, Mr. R.S.Randhawa, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Rahish Pahwa and Ms. Tarranum Madan, Advocates, Jagmal Singh Mandhan assails order dated 01.10.2025 (Annexure 15) passed by the Enrolment Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab & vide which license issued to him to practice as an Advocate has been ected to surrender his enrolment certificate as he was enrolled as an Advocate with the in the year 2006 vide Enrolment and has been practicing at District Courts, Karnal and had also held various positions in the local Bar Associations including the post of 01.10.2025 (Annexure 15) passed by the Enrolment Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab & vide which license issued to him to practice as an Advocate has been ected to surrender his enrolment certificate as the in the year 2006 vide Enrolment and had also held various positions in the local Bar Associations including the post of VIMAL KUMAR 2026.02.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32178-2025 (O&M) President of the Sub Division daughter namely Ms. 2009 and that the petitioner’s son namely Mr. Virender Mandhan enrolled as an Advocate in the year 2010. As per the petitioner, his date of birth, as furnished by his father at the time of 26.11.1973, which has consistently been reflected in all his testimonials including Matriculation certificate, Graduation, LLB, Aadhar Card and PAN Card and that he had never used any other certificate as regards his date of birth. 3. However, pursuant to an anonymous complaint received by the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana record, the Enrolment Committee took up the matter and noticing some short regards petitioner’s date of birth, directed him to submit his matriculation certificate on or before noticed that in case the be correct i.e. old at the time of birth of his children i.e. Ms. Anju Devi (daughter) a Virender Mandhan (son) 2 months between their dates of birth. been raised, before the Enrolment Committee on valid and authenticated documents in support of their dates of birth. (O&M) ( 2 ) President of the Sub Division Bar, Indri. daughter namely Ms. Anju Mandhan got enrolled as an Advocate in the year and that the petitioner’s son namely Mr. Virender Mandhan enrolled as an Advocate in the year 2010. As per the petitioner, his date of as furnished by his father at the time of 26.11.1973, which has consistently been reflected in all his testimonials including Matriculation certificate, Graduation, LLB, Aadhar Card and PAN and that he had never used any other certificate as regards his date of , pursuant to an anonymous complaint received by the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana pertaining to discrepancies in record, the Enrolment Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana took up the matter and vide order dated 05.09.2025 (Annexure P noticing some short-comings in respect of verification and authenticity as regards petitioner’s date of birth, directed him to submit his matriculation certificate on or before 12.09.2025. While passing th that in case the date of birth as declared by the petitioner is taken to be correct i.e. 26.11.1973, the same would imply that he was merely 12 years old at the time of birth of his children i.e. Ms. Anju Devi (daughter) a Virender Mandhan (son), who were born in the year between their dates of birth. Consequently, strong suspicion having been raised, the petitioner as well as his children were before the Enrolment Committee on 12.09.2025 valid and authenticated documents in support of their dates of birth. It is averred that the petitioner’s got enrolled as an Advocate in the year and that the petitioner’s son namely Mr. Virender Mandhan was also enrolled as an Advocate in the year 2010. As per the petitioner, his date of as furnished by his father at the time of his admission in school, 26.11.1973, which has consistently been reflected in all his testimonials including Matriculation certificate, Graduation, LLB, Aadhar Card and PAN and that he had never used any other certificate as regards his date of , pursuant to an anonymous complaint received by the Bar Council pertaining to discrepancies in the petitioner’s personal of the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana vide order dated 05.09.2025 (Annexure P-2), while comings in respect of verification and authenticity as regards petitioner’s date of birth, directed him to submit his matriculation hile passing the said order, it was also date of birth as declared by the petitioner is taken to 26.11.1973, the same would imply that he was merely 12 years old at the time of birth of his children i.e. Ms. Anju Devi (daughter) and Mr. , who were born in the year 1986 with a gap of only Consequently, strong suspicion having as well as his children were directed to appear 12.09.2025 at 2.00 PM and to submit valid and authenticated documents in support of their dates of birth. It is averred that the petitioner’s got enrolled as an Advocate in the year was also enrolled as an Advocate in the year 2010. As per the petitioner, his date of is 26.11.1973, which has consistently been reflected in all his testimonials including Matriculation certificate, Graduation, LLB, Aadhar Card and PAN and that he had never used any other certificate as regards his date of , pursuant to an anonymous complaint received by the Bar Council personal of the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana 2), while comings in respect of verification and authenticity as regards petitioner’s date of birth, directed him to submit his matriculation , it was also date of birth as declared by the petitioner is taken to 26.11.1973, the same would imply that he was merely 12 years Mr. 1986 with a gap of only Consequently, strong suspicion having directed to appear 2.00 PM and to submit VIMAL KUMAR 2026.02.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32178-2025 (O&M) 4. Pursuant to the notice dated as well as to h a joint reply taking a stand that the dates of birth disclosed by them ones as had their admission in school only on any proof. dates of birth corrected from the authorities concerned by filing a civil suit and were having resort to other necessary proceedings thus, requested therein that the matter may either be adjourned filed. 5. The petitioner and his children ha Committee of Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana dated 12.09.2025 (Annexure P to comply with order dated and also warned licenses may be suspended and necessary steps for the cancellation of the same as well as for registration of an FIR would be 6. Thereafter, a alone, wherein his father had furnished his date of birth as all of his certificates and that he does not possess any record pertaining to his date of birth other than t stand that at the time of admission of his children in school, who provided the particulars as regards date of birth and that it was on account of inadvertence that the date of birth of his (O&M) ( 3 ) Pursuant to the notice dated 06.09.2025 having been issued to the petitioner as well as to his children in compliance of order dated a joint reply taking a stand that the dates of birth disclosed by them d been mentioned by their elders, who were illiterate, their admission in school only on the basis of estimation without there being any proof. It was further stated that they were in the process of getting the dates of birth corrected from the authorities concerned by filing a civil suit and were having resort to other necessary proceedings thus, requested therein that the matter may either be adjourned petitioner and his children having failed to appear Committee of Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana dated 12.09.2025 (Annexure P-4), while grant comply with order dated 05.09.2025, adjourned the matter to 19.09.2025 warned that in case no documents licenses may be suspended and necessary steps for the cancellation of the same as well as for registration of an FIR would be Thereafter, a detailed reply dated 19.09.2025 was filed by the petitioner rein a stand was taken that at the time of his admission in school, his father had furnished his date of birth as all of his certificates and that he does not possess any record pertaining to his date of birth other than the matriculation certificate. Similarly, he took a stand that at the time of admission of his children in school, who provided the particulars as regards date of birth and that it was on account of inadvertence that the date of birth of his 06.09.2025 having been issued to the petitioner is children in compliance of order dated 05.09.2025, they filed a joint reply taking a stand that the dates of birth disclosed by them are the by their elders, who were illiterate, at the time of the basis of estimation without there being It was further stated that they were in the process of getting the dates of birth corrected from the authorities concerned by filing a civil suit and were having resort to other necessary proceedings in this regard and, thus, requested therein that the matter may either be adjourned sine die or be failed to appear before the Enrolment Committee of Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana, the Committee vide order granting another opportunity to them adjourned the matter to 19.09.2025 that in case no documents of proof are produced, their licenses may be suspended and necessary steps for the cancellation of the same as well as for registration of an FIR would be taken against them. 19.09.2025 was filed by the petitioner that at the time of his admission in school, his father had furnished his date of birth as 26.11.1973, which is reflected in all of his certificates and that he does not possess any record pertaining to his he matriculation certificate. Similarly, he took a stand that at the time of admission of his children in school, it was his father who provided the particulars as regards date of birth of petitioner’s children and that it was on account of inadvertence that the date of birth of his 06.09.2025 having been issued to the petitioner they filed are the at the time of the basis of estimation without there being It was further stated that they were in the process of getting the dates of birth corrected from the authorities concerned by filing a civil suit and, or be the Enrolment order another opportunity to them adjourned the matter to 19.09.2025 are produced, their licenses may be suspended and necessary steps for the cancellation of the 19.09.2025 was filed by the petitioner that at the time of his admission in school, 26.11.1973, which is reflected in all of his certificates and that he does not possess any record pertaining to his he matriculation certificate. Similarly, he took a it was his father of petitioner’s children and that it was on account of inadvertence that the date of birth of his VIMAL KUMAR 2026.02.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32178-2025 (O&M) daughter namely Anju Devi came to be recorded as staff although her actual date of birth is of birth of his son namely stated therein that he was married at an early age due to compelling family circumstances and that own physical fitness and prevailing local customs, his fa marriage at that stage. 7. The Enrolment Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana considering the complaint, passed the observing therein that pursuant to the notice issued to the petitioner, submitted a of Adult Education and Training, Delhi (Proadh Shiksha Sansthan) upon verification thereof, it was found that the said Board was not recognized by any competent 8. The Committee, while observing his age on the lesser side in order to enrolment of an individual opined that and directed him to submit the original enrolment certificate and ID card before the Bar Council in the Enrolment Section so that proceeding for termination of the license could be initiated. impugned order dated 01.10.2025 is extracted herein under: the Committee is of the view that the license of the respondent Advocate be suspended with immediate eff directed to submit the original enrolment certificate and ID card (O&M) ( 4 ) namely Anju Devi came to be recorded as staff although her actual date of birth is 13.11.1985 and that the correct date of birth of his son namely Mr. Virender Mandhan herein that he was married at an early age due to compelling family circumstances and that considering his mother’s own physical fitness and prevailing local customs, his fa marriage at that stage. The Enrolment Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana considering the complaint, passed the impugned order dated observing therein that pursuant to the notice issued to the petitioner, submitted a photocopy of his 10+2 certificate purportedly issued by the Board of Adult Education and Training, Delhi (Proadh Shiksha Sansthan) upon verification thereof, it was found that the said Board was not recognized by any competent authority. The Committee, while observing that the petitioner had specifically disclosed his age on the lesser side in order to circumvent the Rule, which prohibits enrolment of an individual as an Advocate who is above 45 years of age that the license of the petitioner be suspended with immediate effect directed him to submit the original enrolment certificate and ID card before the Bar Council in the Enrolment Section so that proceeding for termination of the license could be initiated. impugned order dated 01.10.2025 is extracted herein under: “Keeping in view the above mentioned facts and circumstances, Committee is of the view that the license of the respondent Advocate be suspended with immediate eff directed to submit the original enrolment certificate and ID card namely Anju Devi came to be recorded as 17.10.1986 by the school 13.11.1985 and that the correct date . Virender Mandhan is 18.08.1986. He further herein that he was married at an early age due to compelling family his mother’s ailing health as well as his own physical fitness and prevailing local customs, his father arranged his The Enrolment Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana, while impugned order dated 01.10.2025 observing therein that pursuant to the notice issued to the petitioner, he had 10+2 certificate purportedly issued by the Board of Adult Education and Training, Delhi (Proadh Shiksha Sansthan) and that upon verification thereof, it was found that the said Board was not recognized that the petitioner had specifically disclosed circumvent the Rule, which prohibits as an Advocate who is above 45 years of age the license of the petitioner be suspended with immediate effect directed him to submit the original enrolment certificate and ID card before the Bar Council in the Enrolment Section so that proceeding for termination of the license could be initiated. The operative portion of the impugned order dated 01.10.2025 is extracted herein under: Keeping in view the above mentioned facts and circumstances, Committee is of the view that the license of the respondent- Advocate be suspended with immediate effect and he is further directed to submit the original enrolment certificate and ID card 17.10.1986 by the school 13.11.1985 and that the correct date He further herein that he was married at an early age due to compelling family his ther arranged his , while 01.10.2025 he had 10+2 certificate purportedly issued by the Board and that upon verification thereof, it was found that the said Board was not recognized that the petitioner had specifically disclosed circumvent the Rule, which prohibits as an Advocate who is above 45 years of age, the license of the petitioner be suspended with immediate effect directed him to submit the original enrolment certificate and ID card before the Bar Council in the Enrolment Section so that proceeding for The operative portion of the VIMAL KUMAR 2026.02.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32178-2025 (O&M) before the Bar Council in the Enrolment Section, so that proceedings of the termination of the license be initiated, failing which further necessary action will be take him.” 9. Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner vehemently argued that the Haryana’ has no power of suspend the license of the petitioner and that it was only the ‘Bar Council of India’, which is competent further been submitted that terms of Section 35 of the Advoca suspend the license or even to remove the name of the advocate from the State roll, but Committee and that in terms of Council or any Committee constituted by it may examine an application pertaining to enrolment as an Advocate, but it is only the Bar Council of India, which either on a reference made to it or otherwise pertaining to enrolment by mis name of such person. 10. 10. On the other hand, learned while admitting that it is the Bar Council of India whi rolls of Advocate on grounds of having got enrolment on the basis of mis representation, fraud etc., enrolment can duly be considered by the Enrolment Committee Enrolment Committee which has the power to order for enrolment and also to refuse the enrolment and as such, the Enrolment Committee, being vested (O&M) ( 5 ) before the Bar Council in the Enrolment Section, so that proceedings of the termination of the license be initiated, failing which further necessary action will be taken and the FIR will be registered against ” Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner vehemently argued that the ‘Enrolment Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab & has no power of suspend the license of the petitioner and that it was only the ‘Bar Council of India’, which is competent further been submitted that while the disciplinary committee constituted in terms of Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961 would be competent to suspend the license or even to remove the name of the advocate from the , but such power of suspension is not vested with the Committee and that in terms of Section 26 of the said Act Council or any Committee constituted by it may examine an application pertaining to enrolment as an Advocate, but it is only the Bar Council of India, which either on a reference made to it or otherwise pertaining to enrolment by mis-representation, fraud etc. may remove the name of such person. may remove the name of such person. On the other hand, learned senior counsel representing respondent No.1 while admitting that as per proviso to Section 26 of the Advocates Act, 1961, it is the Bar Council of India which is competent to remove a person from the of Advocate on grounds of having got enrolment on the basis of mis representation, fraud etc., submitted that the question as regards propriety of enrolment can duly be considered by the Enrolment Committee Enrolment Committee which has the power to order for enrolment and also to refuse the enrolment and as such, the Enrolment Committee, being vested before the Bar Council in the Enrolment Section, so that proceedings of the termination of the license be initiated, failing which further n and the FIR will be registered against Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner vehemently Enrolment Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab & has no power of suspend the license of the petitioner and that it was only the ‘Bar Council of India’, which is competent in this regard. It has disciplinary committee constituted in tes Act, 1961 would be competent to suspend the license or even to remove the name of the advocate from the such power of suspension is not vested with the Enrolment Section 26 of the said Act, while the State Bar Council or any Committee constituted by it may examine an application pertaining to enrolment as an Advocate, but it is only the Bar Council of India, which either on a reference made to it or otherwise, in a matter representation, fraud etc. may remove the senior counsel representing respondent No.1 as per proviso to Section 26 of the Advocates Act, 1961, ch is competent to remove a person from the of Advocate on grounds of having got enrolment on the basis of mis submitted that the question as regards propriety of enrolment can duly be considered by the Enrolment Committee since it is the Enrolment Committee which has the power to order for enrolment and also to refuse the enrolment and as such, the Enrolment Committee, being vested Learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner vehemently Enrolment Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab & has no power of suspend the license of the petitioner and that it was It has disciplinary committee constituted in tes Act, 1961 would be competent to suspend the license or even to remove the name of the advocate from the Enrolment Bar Council or any Committee constituted by it may examine an application pertaining to enrolment as an Advocate, but it is only the Bar Council of , in a matter representation, fraud etc. may remove the senior counsel representing respondent No.1, as per proviso to Section 26 of the Advocates Act, 1961, ch is competent to remove a person from the of Advocate on grounds of having got enrolment on the basis of mis- submitted that the question as regards propriety of since it is the Enrolment Committee which has the power to order for enrolment and also to refuse the enrolment and as such, the Enrolment Committee, being vested VIMAL KUMAR 2026.02.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32178-2025 (O&M) with such power, cannot be said to be absolutely powerless to take action in case enrolment It has been submitted that the Enrolment Committee upon examining the matter intended to refer the matter to the Bar Council of India and it was for this purpose that the Enrolment Committee of Haryana issued directions to the and ID card, which the petitioner did not comply with and approach this Court instead. 11. We have considered the rival judgments pressed into service on behalf of the petitioner as well as of the respondents. 12. Before proceeding further, it is apposite to bear in mind the scheme of the Act pertaining to enrolment, 26A, 35, 36 “26. Disposal of applications for admission as an advocate Council shall refer every application for admission as an advocate to its enrolment committee, and subject to the provisions of sub (3) [and to any direction that may be given in writing by the State Bar Council in this behalf], prescribed manner: reference made to it in this behalf or otherwise, that any person has got his name entered on the roll of advo fact or by fraud or undue influence, remove the name of such person from the roll of advocates after giving him an opportunity of being heard. (2) refuse any such application, it shall refer the application for opinion to the Bar Council of India and every such reference shall be accompanied by a statement of the grounds in support of the refusal of the application. (O&M) ( 6 ) with such power, cannot be said to be absolutely powerless to take action in case enrolment by way of fraud, mis-representation etc. comes to its notice. It has been submitted that the Enrolment Committee upon examining the intended to refer the matter to the Bar Council of India and it was for this purpose that the Enrolment Committee of issued directions to the petitioner to submit his enrolment certificate and ID card, which the petitioner did not comply with and approach this Court instead. We have considered the rival submissions judgments pressed into service on behalf of the petitioner as well as respondents. Before proceeding further, it is apposite to bear in mind the scheme of the Act pertaining to enrolment, removal etc. The relevant , 36 & 42 of the Advocates Act, 1961, Disposal of applications for admission as an advocate Council shall refer every application for admission as an advocate to its enrolment committee, and subject to the provisions of sub (3) [and to any direction that may be given in writing by the State Bar Council in this behalf], such committee shall dispose of the application in the prescribed manner: [Provided that the Bar Council of India may, if satisfied, either on a reference made to it in this behalf or otherwise, that any person has got his name entered on the roll of advocates by misrepresentation as to an essential fact or by fraud or undue influence, remove the name of such person from the roll of advocates after giving him an opportunity of being heard. Where the enrolment committee of a State Bar Council proposes refuse any such application, it shall refer the application for opinion to the Bar Council of India and every such reference shall be accompanied by a statement of the grounds in support of the refusal of the application. with such power, cannot be said to be absolutely powerless to take action in representation etc. comes to its notice. It has been submitted that the Enrolment Committee upon examining the intended to refer the matter to the Bar Council of India and it was for this purpose that the Enrolment Committee of the Bar Council of Punjab & petitioner to submit his enrolment certificate and ID card, which the petitioner did not comply with and rather chose to submissions and have also gone through the judgments pressed into service on behalf of the petitioner as well as on behalf Before proceeding further, it is apposite to bear in mind the scheme of the Act The relevant Sections i.e. Sections 26, of the Advocates Act, 1961, are reproduced herein under: Disposal of applications for admission as an advocate. – (1) A State Bar Council shall refer every application for admission as an advocate to its enrolment committee, and subject to the provisions of sub-sections (2) and (3) [and to any direction that may be given in writing by the State Bar such committee shall dispose of the application in the Provided that the Bar Council of India may, if satisfied, either on a reference made to it in this behalf or otherwise, that any person has got his cates by misrepresentation as to an essential fact or by fraud or undue influence, remove the name of such person from the roll of advocates after giving him an opportunity of being heard.] Where the enrolment committee of a State Bar Council proposes to refuse any such application, it shall refer the application for opinion to the Bar Council of India and every such reference shall be accompanied by a statement of the grounds in support of the refusal of the application. with such power, cannot be said to be absolutely powerless to take action in representation etc. comes to its notice. It has been submitted that the Enrolment Committee upon examining the intended to refer the matter to the Bar Council of India and it was for the Bar Council of Punjab & petitioner to submit his enrolment certificate chose to and have also gone through the on behalf Before proceeding further, it is apposite to bear in mind the scheme of the Act 26, VIMAL KUMAR 2026.02.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32178-2025 (O&M) (3) application referred to the Bar Council of India under sub conformity with the opinion of the Bar Council of India. (4) any applicat shall, as soon as may be, send intimation to all other State Bar Councils about such refusal stating the name, address and qualifications of the person whose application was refused and th 26A. Power to remove names from roll. the State roll the name of any advocate who is dead or from whom a request has been received to that effect. 35. Punishment of advocates for misconduct. complaint or otherwise a State Bar Council has reason to believe that any advocate on its roll shall refer the case for disposal to (1A) (2) (3) (4) (5) (O&M) ( 7 ) The enrolment committee of a State Bar Council shall dispose of any application referred to the Bar Council of India under sub conformity with the opinion of the Bar Council of India. Where the enrolment committee of a State Bar Council has refused any application for admission as an advocate on its roll, the State Bar Council shall, as soon as may be, send intimation to all other State Bar Councils about such refusal stating the name, address and qualifications of the person whose application was refused and the grounds for the refusal. Power to remove names from roll. – A State Bar Council may remove from the State roll the name of any advocate who is dead or from whom a request has been received to that effect.” xx Punishment of advocates for misconduct. complaint or otherwise a State Bar Council has reason to believe that any advocate on its roll has been guilty of professional or other misconduct shall refer the case for disposal to its disciplinary committee. The State Bar Council may, either of its own motion or on application made to it by any person interested, withdraw a proceeding pending before its disciplinary committee and direct the inquiry to be made by any other disciplinary committee of that State Bar Council. The disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council shall fix a date for the hearing of the case and shall cause a notice thereof to be given to the advocate concerned and to the Advocate The disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council advocate concerned and the Advocate being heard, may make any of the following orders, namely: (a) dismiss the complaint or, where the proceedings were initiated at the instance of the State Bar Council, direct that the proceedings be filed; (b) reprimand the advocate; (c) suspend the advocate from practice for such period as it may deem fit; (d) remove the name of the advocate from the State roll of advocates. Where an advocate is suspended from practice under clause (c) of sub-section (3), he shall, during the period of suspension, be debarred from practising in any court or before any authority or person Where any notice is issued to the Advocate (2), the Advocate-General may appear before the disciplinary f a State Bar Council shall dispose of any application referred to the Bar Council of India under sub-section (2) in conformity with the opinion of the Bar Council of India. Where the enrolment committee of a State Bar Council has refused ion for admission as an advocate on its roll, the State Bar Council shall, as soon as may be, send intimation to all other State Bar Councils about such refusal stating the name, address and qualifications of the person whose e grounds for the refusal. A State Bar Council may remove from the State roll the name of any advocate who is dead or from whom a request xx Punishment of advocates for misconduct. – (1) Where on receipt of a complaint or otherwise a State Bar Council has reason to believe that any has been guilty of professional or other misconduct, it its disciplinary committee. The State Bar Council may, either of its own motion or on application made to it by any person interested, withdraw a proceeding pending before its disciplinary committee and direct the inquiry to be made by plinary committee of that State Bar Council. The disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council shall fix a date for the hearing of the case and shall cause a notice thereof to be given to the advocate concerned and to the Advocate-General of the State. The disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council after giving the advocate concerned and the Advocate-General an opportunity of being heard, may make any of the following orders, namely:- the complaint or, where the proceedings were initiated at the instance of the State Bar Council, direct that the from practice for such period as it may of the advocate from the State roll of Where an advocate is suspended from practice under clause (c) of section (3), he shall, during the period of suspension, be debarred actising in any court or before any authority or person in India. Where any notice is issued to the Advocate-General under sub-section General may appear before the disciplinary VIMAL KUMAR 2026.02.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32178-2025 (O&M) 36. Disciplinary powers of Bar Council of India.― complaint or otherwise the Bar Council of India has reason to believe that any advocate whose name is not entered on any State roll has been guilty of professional or other misconduct, disciplinary committee. (2) (3) (4) 42. Powers of disciplinary committee Bar Council shall have the same powers as are vested in a Civil Court under the Code of C matters, namely: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (O&M) ( 8 ) committee of the State Bar Council either in person or through any advocate appearing on his behalf.” Disciplinary powers of Bar Council of India.― complaint or otherwise the Bar Council of India has reason to believe that any advocate whose name is not entered on any State roll has been guilty of professional or other misconduct, it shall refer the case for disposal to its disciplinary committee. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Chapter, the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India may, or on a report by any State Bar Council or o by any person interested], withdraw for inquiry before itself any proceedings for disciplinary action against any advocate pending before the disciplinary committee of any State Bar Council and dispose of the same. The disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India, in disposing of any case under this section, shall observe, so far as may be, the procedure laid down in section 35, the references to the Advocate General in that section being construed as references to the General of India. In disposing of any proceedings under this section the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India may make any order which the disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council can make under sub section (3) of section 35, and where any proceedings have been withdrawn for inquiry [before the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India], the State Bar Council concerned shall give effect to any such order. xx Powers of disciplinary committee. – (1) Bar Council shall have the same powers as are vested in a Civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), in respect of the following matters, namely: summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person and examining him on oath; requiring discovery and production of any documents; receiving evidence on affidavits; requisitioning any public record or copies thereof from any Court or office; issuing commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents; and committee of the State Bar Council either in person or through any Disciplinary powers of Bar Council of India.― (1) Where on receipt of a complaint or otherwise the Bar Council of India has reason to believe that any advocate whose name is not entered on any State roll has been guilty of it shall refer the case for disposal to its Notwithstanding anything contained in this Chapter, the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India may, [either of its own motion or on a report by any State Bar Council or on an application made to it by any person interested], withdraw for inquiry before itself any proceedings for disciplinary action against any advocate pending before the disciplinary committee of any State Bar Council and iplinary committee of the Bar Council of India, in disposing of any case under this section, shall observe, so far as may be, the procedure laid down in section 35, the references to the Advocate- General in that section being construed as references to the Attorney- In disposing of any proceedings under this section the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India may make any order which the disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council can make under sub- 35, and where any proceedings have been withdrawn for inquiry [before the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India], the State Bar Council concerned shall give effect to xx (1) The disciplinary committee of a Bar Council shall have the same powers as are vested in a Civil Court under ivil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), in respect of the following and enforcing the attendance of any person and requiring discovery and production of any documents; requisitioning any public record or copies thereof from any Court or ng commissions for the examination of witnesses or documents; VIMAL KUMAR 2026.02.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32178-2025 (O&M) (f) Provided that no such disciplinary committee shall have the right to require the attendance of (a) (b) (2) (3) (4) (5) (O&M) ( 9 ) any other matter which may be prescribed: Provided that no such disciplinary committee shall have the right to require the attendance of – any presiding officer of a Court except wi the High Court to which such Court is subordinate; any officer of a revenue Court except with the previous sanction of the State Government. All proceedings before a disciplinary committee of a Bar Council shall be deemed to be judicial proceedings within the meaning of sections 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), and every such disciplinary committee shall be deemed to be a Civil Court for the purposes of sections 480, 482 and 485 of the [Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. For the purposes of exercising any of the powers conferred by sub section (1), a disciplinary committee may send to any Civil Court in the territories to which this Act extends, any summons or other process, for the attendance of a document required by the committee or any commission which it desires to issue, and the Civil Court shall cause such process to be served or such commission to be issued, as the case may be, and may enforce any such process as if it were a process for attendance or production before itself. Notwithstanding the absence of the Chairman or any member of a disciplinary committee on a date fixed for the hearing of a case before it, the disciplinary committee may, if it so think the proceedings on the date so fixed and no such proceedings and no order made by the disciplinary committee in any such proceedings shall be invalid merely by reason of the absence of the Chairman or member thereof on any such date: Provided that no final orders of the nature referred to in sub (3) of section 35 shall be made in any proceeding unless the Chairman and other members of the disciplinary committee are present. Where no final orders of the nature referred to in sub section 35 can be made in any proceeding in accordance with the opinion of the Chairman and the members of a disciplinary committee either for want of majority opinion amongst themselves the case, with their opinion thereon, shall be laid before the Chairman of the Bar Council concerned or if the Chairman of the Bar Council is acting as the Chairman or a member of the disciplinary committee, any other matter which may be prescribed: Provided that no such disciplinary committee shall have the right to require any presiding officer of a Court except with the previous sanction of the High Court to which such Court is subordinate; any officer of a revenue Court except with the previous sanction of All proceedings before a disciplinary committee of a Bar Council d to be judicial proceedings within the meaning of sections 193 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860), and every such disciplinary committee shall be deemed to be a Civil Court for the purposes of sections 480, 482 and 485 of the [Code of For the purposes of exercising any of the powers conferred by sub- section (1), a disciplinary committee may send to any Civil Court in the territories to which this Act extends, any summons or other process, for the attendance of a witness or the production of a document required by the committee or any commission which it desires to issue, and the Civil Court shall cause such process to be served or such commission to be issued, as the case may be, and may s if it were a process for attendance or Notwithstanding the absence of the Chairman or any member of a disciplinary committee on a date fixed for the hearing of a case before it, the disciplinary committee may, if it so thinks fit, hold or continue the proceedings on the date so fixed and no such proceedings and no order made by the disciplinary committee in any such proceedings shall be invalid merely by reason of the absence of the Chairman or Provided that no final orders of the nature referred to in sub-section (3) of section 35 shall be made in any proceeding unless the Chairman and other members of the disciplinary committee are present. Where no final orders of the nature referred to in sub-section (3) of section 35 can be made in any proceeding in accordance with the opinion of the Chairman and the members of a disciplinary committee either for want of majority opinion amongst themselves or otherwise, the case, with their opinion thereon, shall be laid before the Chairman of the Bar Council concerned or if the Chairman of the Bar Council is acting as the Chairman or a member of the disciplinary committee, VIMAL KUMAR 2026.02.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32178-2025 (O&M) 13. It may here be the alleged fraudulent enrolment and do not pertain to any kind of other allegations of to misconduct are dealt with by a disci provided in terms of Section 35 the matters pertaining to fraudulent enrolments would not fall within the domain of disciplinary committee. Advocates Act The said proviso is reproduced herein under: reference made to it in this behalf or otherwise, that any p name entered on the roll of advocates fact or by fraud or undue influence, remove the name roll of advocates after giving him an opportunity of being heard. 14. Hon’ble the M. Bhuvaneswari Vs. The Bar Council of India, Rep. by its Secretary & others, AIR the State Bar Council regarding removal of roll of an Advocate, who had got himself enrolled by mis “14. The above provision makes it clear that it enables Bar Council of India, either on a reference made on it or otherwise may remove the roll of advocate who entered on the roll by misrepresentation as to an essential fact or by fraud or undue influence. 15. It is well settled, that proviso cannot be read in isolation from the main enactment nor can be used to defeat the real object of the main enactment. In (O&M) ( 10 ) before the Vice-Chairman of the Bar Council, and the said Chairman or the Vice-Chairman of the Bar Council, as the case may be, after such hearing as he thinks fit, shall deliver his opinion and the final order of the disciplinary committee shall follow such opinion. It may here be mentioned that the instant case is of proceedings arising out of the alleged fraudulent enrolment and do not pertain to any kind of other allegations of professional or other misconduct. to misconduct are dealt with by a disci provided in terms of Section 35 as well as Section 36 of the Advocates Act, the matters pertaining to fraudulent enrolments would not fall within the domain of disciplinary committee. In terms of proviso to Section 26(1) of Advocates Act, it is only the Bar Council of India, which has such powers. said proviso is reproduced herein under: “Provided that the Bar Council of India may, if satisfied, either on a reference made to it in this behalf or otherwise, that any p name entered on the roll of advocates by misrepresentation as to an essential fact or by fraud or undue influence, remove the name roll of advocates after giving him an opportunity of being heard. the Division Bench of Madras High Court in a judgment reported as M. Bhuvaneswari Vs. The Bar Council of India, Rep. by its Secretary & AIR 2018 Madras 139 (DB), while examining the scope of powers of the State Bar Council regarding removal of roll of an Advocate, who had got himself enrolled by mis-representation, held as under: The above provision makes it clear that it enables Bar Council of India, either on a reference made on it or otherwise may remove the roll of advocate who entered on the roll by misrepresentation as to an essential fact or by fraud or undue influence. It is well settled, that proviso cannot be read in isolation from the main tment nor can be used to defeat the real object of the main enactment. In ar Council, and the said Chairman Chairman of the Bar Council, as the case may be, after such hearing as he thinks fit, shall deliver his opinion and the final order of the disciplinary committee shall follow such opinion.” mentioned that the instant case is of proceedings arising out of the alleged fraudulent enrolment and do not pertain to any kind of other misconduct. While complaints pertaining to misconduct are dealt with by a disciplinary committee specifically as well as Section 36 of the Advocates Act, the matters pertaining to fraudulent enrolments would not fall within the n terms of proviso to Section 26(1) of the , it is only the Bar Council of India, which has such powers. said proviso is reproduced herein under: Provided that the Bar Council of India may, if satisfied, either on a reference made to it in this behalf or otherwise, that any person has got his by misrepresentation as to an essential fact or by fraud or undue influence, remove the name of such person from the roll of advocates after giving him an opportunity of being heard.” Madras High Court in a judgment reported as M. Bhuvaneswari Vs. The Bar Council of India, Rep. by its Secretary & , while examining the scope of powers of the State Bar Council regarding removal of roll of an Advocate, who had got held as under: The above provision makes it clear that it enables Bar Council of India, either on a reference made on it or otherwise may remove the roll of advocate who entered on the roll by misrepresentation as to an essential fact or by fraud or It is well settled, that proviso cannot be read in isolation from the main tment nor can be used to defeat the real object of the main enactment. In mentioned that the instant case is of proceedings arising out of the alleged fraudulent enrolment and do not pertain to any kind of other complaints pertaining plinary committee specifically as well as Section 36 of the Advocates Act, the matters pertaining to fraudulent enrolments would not fall within the the , it is only the Bar Council of India, which has such powers. Madras High Court in a judgment reported as M. Bhuvaneswari Vs. The Bar Council of India, Rep. by its Secretary & , while examining the scope of powers of the State Bar Council regarding removal of roll of an Advocate, who had got VIMAL KUMAR 2026.02.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32178-2025 (O&M) this regard it is useful to refer the relevant portion of the judgement reported in (2015) 2 Surpeme Court Cases 701 [Sidhharth Viyas and Another v. Ravinath Misra and others]: “15. "27. 16. When the State Bar Counci as an advocate on its roll, it cannot be said that State Bar Council has denuded its power to regulate a member or a person who entered its roll by fraudulent means or misrepresentation that the proviso to Section 26(1) of the Advocates Act, 1961, at the most can be construed as enabling provision which gives a power to Bar Council of India also to remove any of the person from the roll of the State Bar Council either on a reference such member enrolled on its roll by misrepresentation as to an essential fact or by way of fraudulent activities or undue influence etc., such enabling provision cannot be construed that State Bar Coun admit any person as an advocate on its roll have no right at all to deal with its power to regulate the legal profession. If the intention of the legislature was to take away the power of the State Bar Council to remove the members f its roll, the power to admit a person as an advocate on its roll would not have been given to the State Bar Council as per Section 26(1),(2),(3) and (4) of the Advocates Act, 1961. Section 26(1) cannot Council to remove an Advocate from its roll for misrepresentation as to an essential fact or fraudulent act or undue influence etc., at the time of enrollment (O&M) ( 11 ) this regard it is useful to refer the relevant portion of the judgement reported in (2015) 2 Surpeme Court Cases 701 [Sidhharth Viyas and Another v. Ravinath Misra and others]:- In S. Sundaram Pillai & others vs. V.R. Pattabiraman [17 SCC 591 [LQ/SC/1985/23] , it was observed: (SCC pp.606 27-30) The next question that arises for consideration is as to what is the scope of a proviso and what is the ambit of an Explanation either to a proviso or to any other statutory provision. We shall first take up the question of the nature, scope and exten established rule of interpretation of a proviso is that a proviso may have three separate functions. Normally, a proviso is meant to be an exception to something within the main enactment or to qualify something enacted therein which but for the proviso would be within the purview of the enactment. In other words, a proviso cannot be torn apart from the main enactment nor can it be used to nullify or set at naught the real object of the main enactment. When the State Bar Council was vested with power to admit any person as an advocate on its roll, it cannot be said that State Bar Council has denuded its power to regulate a member or a person who entered its roll by fraudulent means or misrepresentation that the proviso to Section 26(1) of the Advocates Act, 1961, at the most can be construed as enabling provision which gives a power to Bar Council of India also to remove any of the person from the roll of the State Bar Council either on a reference made to it by the State Bar Council or otherwise. When such member enrolled on its roll by misrepresentation as to an essential fact or by way of fraudulent activities or undue influence etc., such enabling provision cannot be construed that State Bar Coun admit any person as an advocate on its roll have no right at all to deal with its power to regulate the legal profession. If the intention of the legislature was to take away the power of the State Bar Council to remove the members f its roll, the power to admit a person as an advocate on its roll would not have been given to the State Bar Council as per Section 26(1),(2),(3) and (4) of the Advocates Act, 1961. Therefore, we are of the view that the proviso to Section 26(1) cannot be construed to exclude the power of the State Bar Council to remove an Advocate from its roll for misrepresentation as to an essential fact or fraudulent act or undue influence etc., at the time of enrollment. this regard it is useful to refer the relevant portion of the judgement reported in (2015) 2 Surpeme Court Cases 701 [Sidhharth Viyas and Another v. In S. Sundaram Pillai & others vs. V.R. Pattabiraman [17 (1985) 1 , it was observed: (SCC pp.606-07, paras The next question that arises for consideration is as to what is the scope of a proviso and what is the ambit of an Explanation either to a proviso or to any other statutory provision. We shall first take up the question of the nature, scope and extent of a proviso. The well established rule of interpretation of a proviso is that a proviso may have three separate functions. Normally, a proviso is meant to be an exception to something within the main enactment or to qualify ch but for the proviso would be within the purview of the enactment. In other words, a proviso cannot be torn apart from the main enactment nor can it be used to nullify or set at naught the real object of the main enactment.” l was vested with power to admit any person as an advocate on its roll, it cannot be said that State Bar Council has denuded its power to regulate a member or a person who entered its roll by fraudulent means or misrepresentation. Therefore, we are of the view that the proviso to Section 26(1) of the Advocates Act, 1961, at the most can be construed as enabling provision which gives a power to Bar Council of India also to remove any of the person from the roll of the State Bar Council made to it by the State Bar Council or otherwise. When such member enrolled on its roll by misrepresentation as to an essential fact or by way of fraudulent activities or undue influence etc., such enabling provision cannot be construed that State Bar Council which has power to admit any person as an advocate on its roll have no right at all to deal with its power to regulate the legal profession. If the intention of the legislature was to take away the power of the State Bar Council to remove the members from its roll, the power to admit a person as an advocate on its roll would not have been given to the State Bar Council as per Section 26(1),(2),(3) and (4) of the Therefore, we are of the view that the proviso to be construed to exclude the power of the State Bar Council to remove an Advocate from its roll for misrepresentation as to an essential fact or fraudulent act or undue influence etc., at the time of VIMAL KUMAR 2026.02.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32178-2025 (O&M) 17. The main object of the Advocates Act, 196 qualification for the admission of persons to be advocates. When the State Bar Council is vested with power to admit members, such power includes to remove from its role. For this Section 16 of the General Clauses Act can be imported. 18. When the main Act is silent about the specific provisions, the provision of the General Clauses Act also can be imported. Therefore, we are of the view that the State Bar Council has a power to issue interim prohibitory order as against any me by resorting fraudulent acts and misrepresentation and besides producing false certificates etc action against such unscruplous members on its roll. It is high time for State Bar Council to take appropriate action to weed out the unscruplous members from its role. We are not persuaded to accept the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is upto the Bar Council of India to decide the issue. a power to enroll the members on its role has a power to pass prohibitory order 15. A perusal of the aforesaid j power of the State Bar Council particularly as regards passing of any prohibitory orders. when the State Bar Council or the Enrolment Committee regards alleged mis the time of his enrolment. 16. As far as judgment relied upon by the petitioner Vs. Enrolment Committee, Bar Council of Punjab and Haryan Chandigarh & others, CWP we find that the said judgment is primarily based on a concession made by the counsel for the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana and no adjudication was made therein pertain (O&M) ( 12 ) The main object of the Advocates Act, 196 qualification for the admission of persons to be advocates. When the State Bar Council is vested with power to admit members, such power includes to remove from its role. For this Section 16 of the General Clauses Act can be mported. When the main Act is silent about the specific provisions, the provision of the General Clauses Act also can be imported. Therefore, we are of the view that the State Bar Council has a power to issue interim prohibitory order as against any member who got themselves enrolled as a member by resorting fraudulent acts and misrepresentation and besides producing false certificates etc. It is only the State Bar Council can take action against such unscruplous members on its roll. It is high time for State Bar Council to take appropriate action to weed out the unscruplous members from its role. We are not persuaded to accept the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is upto the Bar Council of India to decide the issue. Hence, we are of the view that the State Bar Council which has a power to enroll the members on its role has a power to pass prohibitory order. In view of the same, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. A perusal of the aforesaid judgment leaves no manner of doubt as regards power of the State Bar Council particularly as regards passing of any prohibitory orders. Needless to mention, any prohibitory order when the State Bar Council or the Enrolment Committee regards alleged mis-representation, fraud etc. committed by the Advocate at the time of his enrolment. As far as judgment relied upon by the petitioner Vs. Enrolment Committee, Bar Council of Punjab and Haryan Chandigarh & others, CWP-3673-2021 decided on we find that the said judgment is primarily based on a concession made by the counsel for the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana and no adjudication was made therein pertaining to the scope or the powers vested with the Enrolment The main object of the Advocates Act, 1961, is to prescribe an uniform qualification for the admission of persons to be advocates. When the State Bar Council is vested with power to admit members, such power includes to remove from its role. For this Section 16 of the General Clauses Act can be When the main Act is silent about the specific provisions, the provision of the General Clauses Act also can be imported. Therefore, we are of the view that the State Bar Council has a power to issue interim prohibitory mber who got themselves enrolled as a member by resorting fraudulent acts and misrepresentation and besides . It is only the State Bar Council can take action against such unscruplous members on its roll. It is high time for the State Bar Council to take appropriate action to weed out the unscruplous members from its role. We are not persuaded to accept the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is upto the Bar Council of India to decide are of the view that the State Bar Council which has a power to enroll the members on its role has a power to pass prohibitory . In view of the same, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.” (…emphasis supplied) udgment leaves no manner of doubt as regards power of the State Bar Council particularly as regards passing of any Needless to mention, any prohibitory order is to be only when the State Bar Council or the Enrolment Committee is satisfied as representation, fraud etc. committed by the Advocate at As far as judgment relied upon by the petitioner i.e. Suresh Kumar, Advocate Vs. Enrolment Committee, Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana High Court, 2021 decided on 16.03.2021, is concerned, we find that the said judgment is primarily based on a concession made by the counsel for the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana and no adjudication was ing to the scope or the powers vested with the Enrolment udgment leaves no manner of doubt as regards power of the State Bar Council particularly as regards passing of any only satisfied as representation, fraud etc. committed by the Advocate at , Advocate a High Court, is concerned, we find that the said judgment is primarily based on a concession made by the counsel for the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana and no adjudication was ing to the scope or the powers vested with the Enrolment VIMAL KUMAR 2026.02.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32178-2025 (O&M) Committee. Similarly, we find that the other judgment pressed into service by the learned counsel for the petitioner in Council of Punjab & Haryana, CWP arose out of a case where the license of an Advocate had been suspended by the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana while referring to a complaint made to the disciplinary made therein against the Advocate pertain on Facebook enrolment by mis would not have any application to the present case. 17. In the present case, the observations recorded in the impugned order 01.10.2025 (Annexure P birth of the petitioner and of his child are highly improbable. In any case, Committee has not removed the opined that the license be suspended. As such, it is clarified impugned order is to be treated as a recommendation for removal with an interim measure of suspension of license. However, we are also conscious of the fact that the impugned order was passed way October, 2025 and it will ind license has been suspended without taking any final decision in the matter. Therefore, respondent immediately refer the matter to the Bar Council of India matter pertaining to removal of petitioner’s name from the rolls. (O&M) ( 13 ) Committee. Similarly, we find that the other judgment pressed into service by the learned counsel for the petitioner in Council of Punjab & Haryana, CWP-13235 arose out of a case where the license of an Advocate had been suspended by the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana while referring to a complaint made to disciplinary committee. It may here be mentioned that the complaint made therein against the Advocate pertained Facebook, which in any case did not pertain to any issue as regards enrolment by mis-representation, fraud etc. would not have any application to the present case. In the present case, the observations recorded in the impugned order 01.10.2025 (Annexure P-15) do point towards birth of the petitioner and of his children, which are not only suspicious, but are highly improbable. In any case, vide the impugned order, Committee has not removed the name of the petitioner opined that the license be suspended. As such, it is clarified impugned order is to be treated as a recommendation for removal with an measure of suspension of license. However, we are also conscious of the fact that the impugned order was passed way October, 2025 and it will indeed create hardship for an Advocate whose license has been suspended without taking any final decision in the matter. fore, respondent No.1 – Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana immediately refer the matter to the Bar Council of India pertaining to removal of petitioner’s name from the rolls. Committee. Similarly, we find that the other judgment pressed into service by the learned counsel for the petitioner in Vijay Bharat Verma Vs. Bar 13235-2020 decided on 23.11.2020 arose out of a case where the license of an Advocate had been suspended by the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana while referring to a complaint made to It may here be mentioned that the complaint ed to certain remarks made by him , which in any case did not pertain to any issue as regards representation, fraud etc. As such, the said judgment would not have any application to the present case. In the present case, the observations recorded in the impugned order dated towards inconsistencies in the dates of ren, which are not only suspicious, but vide the impugned order, the Enrolment name of the petitioner from the rolls, but opined that the license be suspended. As such, it is clarified that the impugned order is to be treated as a recommendation for removal with an measure of suspension of license. However, we are also conscious of the fact that the impugned order was passed way back in the month of ate hardship for an Advocate whose license has been suspended without taking any final decision in the matter. Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana is directed to immediately refer the matter to the Bar Council of India for considering the pertaining to removal of petitioner’s name from the rolls. Committee. Similarly, we find that the other judgment pressed into service Vijay Bharat Verma Vs. Bar 23.11.2020, arose out of a case where the license of an Advocate had been suspended by the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana while referring to a complaint made to It may here be mentioned that the complaint to certain remarks made by him , which in any case did not pertain to any issue as regards udgment dated in the dates of ren, which are not only suspicious, but the Enrolment from the rolls, but that the impugned order is to be treated as a recommendation for removal with an measure of suspension of license. However, we are also conscious of back in the month of ate hardship for an Advocate whose license has been suspended without taking any final decision in the matter. is directed to the VIMAL KUMAR 2026.02.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-32178-2025 (O&M) 18. The petitioner is directed to hand certificate and ID card, to the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana week from today. enrolment certificate and ID card, the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana any case, shall three weeks enrolment of the petitioner shall stand automatically revoked 19. It is further directed that the Bar Council of India upon a reference made by the Bar Council of Punjab & at the earliest. 20. The petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid directions. 19.02.2026 Vimal (O&M) ( 14 ) The petitioner is directed to hand-over his original documents i.e. enrolment certificate and ID card, to the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana week from today. In case, the petitioner does not surrender his original enrolment certificate and ID card, the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana , shall refer the matter to the Bar Council of India within a period of three weeks. In case, the same is not referred, the enrolment of the petitioner shall stand automatically revoked It is further directed that the Bar Council of India upon a reference made by the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana shall take a final decision in the matter at the earliest. The petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid directions. (GURVINDER SINGH GILL Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether reportable: over his original documents i.e. enrolment certificate and ID card, to the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana within one In case, the petitioner does not surrender his original enrolment certificate and ID card, the Bar Council of Punjab & Haryana, refer the matter to the Bar Council of India within a period of In case, the same is not referred, the interim suspension of enrolment of the petitioner shall stand automatically revoked. It is further directed that the Bar Council of India upon a reference made by Haryana shall take a final decision in the matter The petition stands disposed of with the aforesaid directions. GURVINDER SINGH GILL) JUDGE (RAMESH KUMARI) JUDGE Yes/No Yes/No over his original documents i.e. enrolment within one In case, the petitioner does not surrender his original , in refer the matter to the Bar Council of India within a period of suspension of It is further directed that the Bar Council of India upon a reference made by Haryana shall take a final decision in the matter VIMAL KUMAR 2026.02.20 11:36 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document