A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Atul S Chandurkar has granted eight weeks to the BCI to analyze the controversy and file a report.
The bench additionally accepted the plea of Supreme Court docket Advocates On File Affiliation president Vipin Nair who mentioned that BCI ought to first maintain an inquiry on the alleged position of legal professionals solely then ought to the police be concerned if some outsider is discovered to be concerned.
What's the ‘ghost litigant' case?
The case pertains to a litigant who managed to get a beneficial order from the SC after a ‘ghost' opponent propped up in court docket proceedings and instructed the court docket that he had compromised with the petitioner in a land dispute. This had change into the premise for the SC to quash orders handed by a Muzaffarpur trial court docket and Patna HC in opposition to the litigant.
After 5 month, the actual opponent appeared and instructed the highest court docket that he had neither compromised with the petitioner nor engaged any lawyer to characterize him earlier than the court docket. Now, each events are blaming one another for taking part in with the court docket and each of them pressed for police investigation.
The SC has already recalled its order that was handed on the premise of the alleged faux compromise.
Advocate Gyanant Singh, showing for the aggrieved occasion, instructed the court docket that the compromise settlement was faux and his consumer had not signed the compromise deed and all of the paperwork filed by the other occasion within the case are suspect, including {that a} police investigation ought to be ordered.
In the meantime, senior advocate Chinmoy Pradeep Sharma, showing for the other occasion who was the beneficiary of apex court docket's order which now stands withdrawn, argued that the settlement was legitimate as there have been signatures of each events and insisted that FIR ought to be lodged within the case.
Singh, nonetheless, mentioned that his consumer, who's now in his 90s, went unrepresented within the listening to and there was no query of his agreeing to compromise which was in opposition to his curiosity,
The names of 4 legal professionals have been talked about within the order out of which three are identified names within the subject of litigation however nobody had heard of the fourth advocate.
It got here to mild that the lawyer who's advocate-on-record (AoR) and allegedly represented the faux occasion didn't follow regulation any extra and he and his daughter, whose title was additionally there, weren't even conscious of the case.
The court docket, thereafter, directed the third lawyer to look earlier than it.
In a recent twist to the case, the AoR filed an affidavit within the court docket alleging {that a} third lawyer who was working from his chamber was concerned within the case and misused his title to get the paperwork filed within the court docket
