Section 36 of AA : Section 36: Disciplinary Powers Of Bar Council Of India

Explanation using Example

Imagine a scenario where a lawyer, Mr. Sharma, who practices in Delhi, is accused of fabricating evidence in a high-profile case. Although he is not enrolled in any State Bar Council because he primarily practices in tribunals, the gravity of the accusation catches the attention of the Bar Council of India (BCI).

Under Section 36(1) of the Advocates Act, 1961, the BCI, upon receiving a complaint against Mr. Sharma, decides to investigate the matter due to the serious nature of the misconduct. They refer the case to their disciplinary committee to determine if Mr. Sharma has indeed engaged in professional misconduct.

While the case is initially handled by the disciplinary committee of the State Bar Council, given the significance of the case, the BCI exercises its power under Section 36(2) and withdraws the case from the State Bar Council, taking it up for inquiry itself.

During the proceedings, the BCI's disciplinary committee follows the procedure outlined in Section 36(3), akin to the one described in Section 35, ensuring a fair hearing and considering the evidence presented, with references to the Advocate-General being replaced by references to the Attorney-General of India.

After thorough deliberation, the committee concludes that Mr. Sharma is guilty of misconduct. Under Section 36(4), the BCI imposes sanctions on Mr. Sharma, which could include suspension from practice or even disbarment. The State Bar Council, although not directly involved at this stage, is required to enforce the orders given by the BCI's disciplinary committee.