The Supreme Court recently asked a junior lawyer at Gauhati High Court to tender an unconditional apology for misleading the court. The Gauhati High Court has also imposed a cost of Rs 20,000 on the lawyer for the same. However, the apex court has requested the High Court to reconsider the fine after the advocate tenders an apology.
A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra requested a the single judge bench of the High Court to take an appropriate view of the matter having regard to the fact that the mistake was committed by a junior at the bar.
The Supreme Court also appreciated the concern of the High Court by stating that an advocate who appears before the court is, first and foremost, an officer of the court and is expected to discharge duties in that capacity. Mentioning that being a junior at the bar is not an immunity from observing proper code of behaviour, the top court expressed its confidence that the High Court will take a sympathetic view by passing an appropriate order.
Reportedly, the factual matrix of the case is such that there was a suit pending in the trial court, in which the present petitioners were parties. Nonetheless, due to a delay of 22 days in filing the written statement, the Trial Court imposed the cost of Rs 20,000. The petitioner challenged the same and approached the High Court.
Considering his submission, the counsel referred to the time limit for filing a written statement as 120 days instead of 90 days. Notably, as per Order VIII Rule 1, the time limit for filing the written statement is thirty days, which can be extended to 90 days. Meanwhile, for commercial suit, the time limit is 120 days.
The Gauhati High Court expressed displeasure with the submission and dismissed the application imposing the above-mentioned cost.