Lawyer pays website to get clients,held guilty of misconduct

A lawyer, who had paid a website to find clients for him, has been held guilty of professional misconduct by a consumer forum which also asked the Bar Council of Delhi to ban such Internet sites.

The North District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum said the website, which claims to connect buyers with sellers as well as provide comprehensive updated information on products and services for a fee, acted as a "tout" and refused to provide any relief to the advocate who had sought refund of money paid to the website for allegedly failing to follow through on its assurance to provide him clients.

A bench presided by Babu Lal observed that under the 'Standards of Professional Conduct and Etiquette' framed by the Bar Council of Delhi, an advocate is under an obligation not to solicit work or advertise, either directly or indirectly, whether by circulars, advertisements, or through touts.

"For all practical purposes, the opposite party has acted as a tout...As by its own admission, it (the website) has referred clients against monetary consideration of Rs 15,000 for period of contract with the advocate.

"The complainant himself is guilty of committing professional misconduct by resorting to availing services of a tout providing references of cases to him against financial consideration. Such contract being contract against public policy cannot be enforced by the forum nor the complaint can be entertained," the forum said.

@ https://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/lawyer-pays-website-to-get-clients-held-guilty-of-misconduct-113082800498_1.html

Thanks for your response but the act is not very clear it only talks of suspension for Misconduct and not about what happens when a Advocate is convicted wether he is barred from practice where as section 24 of the act talks about disqualification prior to enrolment and does not mention anything what happens after conviction ..

35. Punishment of advocates for misconduct.-

(1) Where on receipt of a 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, it shall refer the case for disposal to its disciplinary committee.

(1A) 3[ 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.]

(2) The disciplinary committee of a State Bar Council 4[ 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.

(3) 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:--

(a) dismiss the complaint or, where the proceedings were initiated at the instance of the State Bar Council, direct that the proceedings be filed;

1. Ins. by Act 60 of 1973, s. 23 (w. e. f. 31- 1- 1974 ). 2. Ins. by Act 38 of 1977, s. 6 (w. e. f. 31- 10- 1977 ). 3. Ins. by Act 60 of 1973, s. 24 (w. e. f. 31- 1- 1974 ). 4. The words", if it does not summarily reject the complaint," omitted by s. 24, ibid. (w. e. f. 31- 1- 1974 ).

(b) reprimand the advocate;

(d) remove the name of the advocate from the State roll of advocates.

(4) 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 in India.

(5) Where any notice is issued to the Advocate- General under sub- section (2), the Advocate- General may appear before the disciplinary committee of the State Bar Council either in person or through any advocate appearing on his behalf. 1[ Explanation.-- In this section, 2[ section 37 and section 38], the expressions" Advocate- General" and" Advocate- General of the State" shall, in relation to the Union territory of Delhi, mean the Additional Solicitor General of India.]

[24A. Disqualification for enrolment.—(1) No person shall be

admitted as an advocate on a State roll—

(a) if he is convicted of an offence involving moral turpitude;

(b) if he is convicted of an offence under the provisions of the

Untouchability (Offences) Act, 1955 (22 of 1955);

4[(c) if he is dismissed or removed from employment or office

under the State on any charge involving moral turpitude.

Explanation.—In this clause, the expression “State” shall have the

meaning assigned to it under Article 12 of the Constitution:]

Provided that the disqualification for enrolment as aforesaid shall

cease to have effect after a period of two years has elapsed since

his