| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1965 SLG 4491 = 1965 SLD 4491 = 1965 PLD 22 |
Supreme Court
Civil Appeal No. 47 of 1962, decided on 25th June 1964.
Presented By: A. R. Cornelius, C. J., S. A. Rahman, Fazle-Akbar, B. Z. Kaikaus and Hamoodur Rahman, JJ
A. K. Brohi Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Shaukat Ali Khawaja Advocate Supreme Court with him, M. A. Pesh Imam Advocate Supreme Court absent) instructed by Khalilur Rahman Attorney on behalf of S. M. Hanif Attorney on record for Appellant. Mahmud Ali Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Yusuf Rafi Attorney for
Respondent.
Civil Appeal No. 47 of 1962, decided on 25th June 1964.
Presented By: A. R. Cornelius, C. J., S. A. Rahman, Fazle-Akbar, B. Z. Kaikaus and Hamoodur Rahman, JJ
A. K. Brohi Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Shaukat Ali Khawaja Advocate Supreme Court with him, M. A. Pesh Imam Advocate Supreme Court absent) instructed by Khalilur Rahman Attorney on behalf of S. M. Hanif Attorney on record for Appellant. Mahmud Ali Senior Advocate Supreme Court (Fakhruddin G. Ebrahim Advocate Supreme Court with him) instructed by Yusuf Rafi Attorney for
Respondent.
A. A. ZARI, ADVOCATE, KARACHI-Appellant
VERSUS
SHARAF FARIDI, ADVOCATE, KARACHI-Respondent
Law: Bar Councils Act (XXX VIII of 1926)
Section: 10(2)
Law: Legal Practitioners Act (XVIII of 1879)
Section: 13
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench, Karachi, dated the 28th February 1962, in Petition under section 10, Bar Councils Act, 1926). Bar Councils Act (XXXVIII of 1926), S. 10(2)-Relates to matter of rejecting complaint in limine-High Court, however, may make inquiry before such rejection-[Faizullah Khan v. Mukamal Shah P L D 1961 S C 34 ref.] Legal Practitioners Act (XVIII of 1879), S. 13-Profes sional misconduct Advocate may advise accused to exercise his lawful right of refusing to make a statement-Tutoring accused, however, to make particular statement of facts to meet allegations against him is professional misconduct-Inducement to make false allegations of behaviour such as attracts legal penalties for his client's opponent is equally such conduct. A lawyer may well advise his client who is accused of a crime to exercise his right in law of refusing to make a statement, but to advise the client to make a particular statement of facts in order to meet the allegations against him involves a delicate responsibility, since the course of justice may well be diverted by even such aspects as the manner of presentation of facts, or the distribution of emphasis as among different facts or sets of facts. But there can be no question of the limits of professional propriety having been exceeded where there is deviation from the truth in the statement prepared for an accused person, and where an allegation of such deviation is made, there would be a substantial case for enquiry and determination under the law. Equally, for a lawyer to induce his client to make false allegations of behaviour such as attracts legal penalties for his client's opponent, would be going well beyond the limits of integrity which a lawyer, as an agent of law and of justice, may be expected to lay upon himself. (c) Legal Practitioners Act (XVIII of 1879), S. 13 Professional misconduct-Advocate's appeal arising from proceedings for allegations of professional misconduct against another Advocate before Supreme Court Parties intimating Court at conclusion of arguments that they do not wish the matter…