Disciplinary Committees are the adjudicatory bodies constituted under the Advocates Act to hear and determine complaints of misconduct. They exist at both State Bar Council and BCI levels, with distinct jurisdictions and powers.
Diagram as text
flowchart TD
M["Complaint of professional misconduct"]
M --> SDC["State BC Disciplinary Committee<br/>(S.9, S.35): 2 elected + 1 co-opted;<br/>original jurisdiction"]
SDC --> O["Orders: dismiss / reprimand /<br/>suspend / remove from roll (S.35)"]
SDC -->|"appeal"| BDC["BCI Disciplinary Committee<br/>(S.9; appeal under S.37)"]
BDC -->|"appeal"| SC["Supreme Court (S.38)"]
SDC --> W["BCI may withdraw a case (S.36(2));<br/>delayed case transfers after 1 year (S.36B)"]Legal Framework
| Provision | Body | Subject |
|---|---|---|
| S.9(1) | Every Bar Council | One or more disciplinary committees of three: two elected members of the Council and one co-opted advocate who is not a member; the senior-most advocate is Chairman |
| S.10A(5) | Disciplinary committees | Meet and follow procedure as prescribed by rules |
| S.35(3) | State DC | Final orders |
| S.36 | BCI DC | Original jurisdiction; withdrawal of cases |
| S.36B | State DC | One-year limit; transfer to BCI |
| S.37 | BCI DC | Appeals from State DC |
| S.42 | All DCs | Civil court powers; quorum rules in S.42(4) and (5) |
| S.43, S.44 | All DCs | Costs; review within 60 days |
| S.48A | BCI | Revision of State Bar Council proceedings where no appeal lies |
Correction: S.10A is about meetings and business, not the composition of the BCI committee, and committees are not made up of three Council members: one member is co-opted from outside the Council.
Composition
State Bar Council Disciplinary Committee
| Feature | Rule |
|---|---|
| Members | 3: two elected by the Council from its members, one co-opted advocate who is not a member (S.9(1)) |
| Co-opted member | Must have the qualifications in the proviso to S.3(2) |
| Chairman | Senior-most advocate among the three |
| Hearing without a member | Allowed on a hearing date (S.42(4)) |
| Final order | Needs the Chairman and all members present (S.42(4) proviso) |
| No majority | Case goes to the Chairman (or Vice-Chairman) of the Bar Council, whose opinion the final order follows (S.42(5)) |
| Multiple committees | "One or more" committees (S.9(1)) |
BCI Disciplinary Committee
| Feature | Rule |
|---|---|
| Members | Same S.9 pattern: two elected BCI members and one co-opted advocate |
| Jurisdiction | Original (S.36(1)), withdrawn cases (S.36(2)), transferred cases (S.36B), appeals (S.37) |
| Chair | Senior-most advocate among the members |
Powers of State Disciplinary Committee (S.35(3))
Penalty Powers
After hearing the advocate and the Advocate-General, the committee may (S.35(3)):
| Order | Clause | Nature | When Imposed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dismiss the complaint, or file proceedings started by the Council | (a) | No misconduct proved | |
| Reprimand | (b) | Censure recorded on the roll (S.41) | Minor misconduct |
| Suspend from practice | (c) | Bar on practice anywhere in India for the period (S.35(4)) | Serious misconduct |
| Remove name from the State roll | (d) | Name struck off; certificate recalled (S.41) | Gravest misconduct |
Correction: the earlier table labelled reprimand (a), suspension (b) and removal (c). The correct letters are (b), (c) and (d).
Incidental Powers
| Power | Source | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Summon and examine on oath | S.42(1)(a) | Secure attendance |
| Discovery and production | S.42(1)(b) | Evidence gathering |
| Evidence on affidavit | S.42(1)(c) | Efficiency |
| Requisition public records | S.42(1)(d) | Court and office records |
| Issue commissions | S.42(1)(e) | Examine witnesses or documents |
| Process through civil courts | S.42(3) | Enforce summons |
| Costs | S.43 | Executable as a High Court or Supreme Court order |
| Stay of its own order pending appeal | S.40(2) | For sufficient cause |
| Review | S.44 | Within 60 days; State review needs BCI approval |
The Act gives no power of interim suspension and no "restoration conditions" proviso; those entries in the earlier note were wrong.
Functions of Bar Councils in Disciplinary Matters
State Bar Council Functions
| Function | Provision |
|---|---|
| Receive complaints and form "reason to believe" | S.35(1) |
| Refer to its disciplinary committee | S.35(1) |
| Move a case to another committee | S.35(1A) |
| Enter punishments on the roll | S.41 |
| Entertain and determine misconduct cases (general function) | S.6(1)(c) |
BCI Functions
| Function | Provision |
|---|---|
| Hear appeals from State DCs | S.37 |
| Withdraw cases from State DCs | S.36(2) |
| Receive cases not finished in a year | S.36B |
| Set standards of professional conduct | S.7(1)(b) |
| Lay down disciplinary procedure | S.7(1)(c) |
| Revise State Bar Council proceedings where no appeal lies | S.48A |
| General supervision of State Bar Councils | S.7(1)(g), S.48B |
Powers of BCI Disciplinary Committee (Appellate)
| Power | Provision | Scope |
|---|---|---|
| Confirm, set aside or pass "such order as it deems fit" | S.37(2) | Full appellate power |
| Vary the punishment | S.37(2) | Increase or decrease |
| Hearing before prejudicial change | S.37(2) proviso | No variation that hurts the appellant without a reasonable opportunity of being heard |
| Remand | S.37(2) | For procedural defects (as in Re An Advocate, 1989) |
Key principle: The BCI can enhance the punishment, but only after giving the affected person a reasonable opportunity of being heard (S.37(2) proviso). The Supreme Court has the same power and the same safeguard under S.38. In D.P. Chadha (2001) the Supreme Court set aside the BCI's enhancement and restored the State committee's five-year suspension.
Civil Court Powers (S.42)
S.42(1) gives the same powers as a civil court under the CPC for:
| Clause | Power |
|---|---|
| (a) | Summoning and enforcing attendance; examining on oath |
| (b) | Discovery and production of documents |
| (c) | Receiving evidence on affidavits |
| (d) | Requisitioning public records |
| (e) | Issuing commissions |
| (f) | Other prescribed matters |
Limits: a presiding officer of a court needs High Court sanction, and a revenue court officer needs State Government sanction, to be summoned. S.42(2): proceedings are judicial proceedings (IPC S.193 and S.228, now the corresponding BNS provisions), and the committee is a civil court for certain CrPC purposes.
Correction: the earlier CPC table (S.30, S.131 to S.134) did not match the Act.
Answer Plan (16 marks)
- Introduction: self-regulation; S.9 committees.
- Composition: two elected, one co-opted; Chairman; S.42(4) and (5).
- Jurisdiction: State DC (S.35); BCI DC (S.36, S.36B, S.37); S.48A revision.
- Powers: S.35(3) orders; S.42 civil court powers; S.43 costs; S.44 review (Shambhu Ram Yadav); S.40 stay.
- Appellate powers: S.37(2), S.38 and the hearing proviso; D.P. Chadha, Prahlad Saran Gupta, Rangadurai.
- Relation with courts: SCBA (1998), BCI v HC Kerala (2004).
- Conclusion.
Recall Check
- How many members constitute a Disciplinary Committee at the State level, and from whom are they drawn?
- What orders can a State DC make under S.35(3)? Give the clause letters.
- Can the BCI Disciplinary Committee enhance the penalty on appeal? What safeguard applies?
- What happens if the committee members cannot reach a majority?
Key Cases
V.C. Rangadurai v D. Gopalan AIR 1979 SC 281 V C Rangadurai v D Gopalan 1979
Held: On appeal under S.38 the Court upheld the finding of gross misconduct and kept the suspension at one year, stressing that punishment should have "a therapeutic touch, a correctional twist" (for example, legal aid work). Use for the purpose of disciplinary penalties.
Prahlad Saran Gupta v Bar Council of India (1997) 3 SCC 585 Prahlad Saran Gupta v Bar Council of India 1997
Held: Wrongful retention of Rs 1,500 received in execution proceedings was misconduct; the Supreme Court reduced the BCI's one-year suspension to a reprimand. Shows the appellate power to vary punishment.
Correction: the earlier citation "(1997) 2 SCC 1" and the claimed rule were wrong.
D.P. Chadha v Triyugi Narain Mishra (2001) 2 SCC 221 DP Chadha v Triyugi Narain Mishra 2000
Held: Finding upheld, BCI's enhancement set aside, State committee's five-year suspension restored.
Bar Council of India v High Court of Kerala (2004) 6 SCC 311 Bar Council of India v High Court of Kerala 2004
Held: A High Court rule (Kerala Rule 11, under S.34) barring an advocate found guilty of contempt from appearing until he purges it is valid. This regulates the right of audience; it is not a disciplinary punishment, which remains with the Bar Councils.
Correction: the earlier note said this case denied courts any role beyond contempt. That overstates it: courts control audience in their own courts.
Distinctions
| Aspect | State Disciplinary Committee | BCI Disciplinary Committee |
|---|---|---|
| Constitution | S.9 | S.9 |
| Members | 2 elected from the State Bar Council + 1 co-opted | 2 elected from the BCI + 1 co-opted |
| Jurisdiction | Original (first instance) | Original (S.36), transferred (S.36B), appellate (S.37) |
| Penalty power | Reprimand, suspend, remove | Same, plus varying on appeal after hearing |
| Appeal from | To BCI DC (S.37) | To Supreme Court (S.38) |
| Withdrawal | State Bar Council may move a case between its committees (S.35(1A)) | Can withdraw from a State DC (S.36(2)) |
| Cases handled | Complaints from individuals | Appeals + withdrawn cases |
Flashcards
Under which section is the State Disciplinary Committee constituted?
Section 9, Advocates Act, 1961.
What are the three penalties under S.35(3)?
(a) dismiss or file; (b) reprimand; (c) suspend for a period; (d) remove from the State roll.
Can the BCI enhance penalty on an advocate's own appeal?
Yes, but only after giving him a reasonable opportunity of being heard (S.37(2) proviso).
Which case held that the Supreme Court cannot suspend an advocate's licence in contempt jurisdiction?
Supreme Court Bar Association v Union of India (1998) 4 SCC 409. Punishing misconduct belongs to the Bar Councils.
What civil court powers does the Disciplinary Committee possess?
Powers under S.42: summon witnesses, require document production, administer oaths, examine witnesses.
Can a High Court discipline an advocate for professional misconduct?
No; that is for the Bar Councils (SCBA, 1998). But a court may, by rules under S.34, bar a contemnor from appearing until he purges the contempt (BCI v High Court of Kerala, 2004).
What is the quorum for a State Disciplinary Committee hearing?
A hearing may go on despite a member's absence, but a final S.35(3) order needs the Chairman and all members present (S.42(4)).
Exam Scenario
Problem: Advocate Girish is found guilty by the Karnataka State DC of keeping money he received for a client and is reprimanded. The complainant thinks this too lenient. Can she appeal? What can the BCI DC do?
| Requirement | Applied | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Appeal by a "person aggrieved" (S.37(1)) | The complainant is affected by the order | Met |
| Within 60 days of communication (S.37(1)) | Must be checked; S.39 allows condonation | Met if in time |
| Power to vary punishment (S.37(2)) | BCI DC may enhance | Met |
| Hearing before prejudicial variation (proviso) | Girish must be heard before enhancement | Must be given |
Conclusion: The appeal is maintainable. The BCI DC can enhance the punishment to suspension or removal after hearing Girish. Retention of client money is misconduct (Prahlad Saran Gupta, 1997), where the Court actually reduced the punishment to a reprimand on the facts. So the outcome depends on the amount, intent and any dishonesty. A further appeal lies to the Supreme Court under S.38. (The earlier answer cited Hikmat Ali Khan for misappropriation; that case is about a courtroom knife attack.)