<p>The High Court of Karnataka has quashed criminal proceedings against a Bengaluru-based advocate in a case initiated by a woman Assistant Conservator of Forests (ACF). </p>.<p>The advocate had represented two persons in a different case filed by the ACF. </p>.Karnataka High Court refuses to quash bribery case against assistant public prosecutor.<p>“If every advocate, merely by a reason of appearing for a litigant, is exposed to criminal prosecution and trauma of investigative proceedings, the inevitable consequence would be a chilling and paralysing effect upon fearless discharge of professional responsibilities. The majesty of the legal profession cannot be permitted to be diminished by disgruntled litigants to wield criminal law as a weapon of intimidation against the members of the bar,” Justice M Nagaprasanna said while allowing the petition filed by the advocate. </p>.<p>The ACF is involved in cases regarding her caste status while securing the job. Meanwhile, she also initiated a matrimonial case. The advocate represented two persons named by the officer in the matrimonial case. He filed an RTI application seeking certain information relating to the officer’s caste to place it before the family court. </p>.<p>Pursuant to this, the ACF filed a complaint against the advocate and others under BNS sections 336(2), 336(3) and 340 for forgery. She argued that the advocate wanted to know beyond what is necessary to be presented before the family court and hence the investigation should continue. </p>.<p>After perusing the complaint, the court noted that the advocate’s role in the entire episode of crime is appearing as counsel for two persons and procuring certain documents from the school, that too at the instance of his clients. There is not even a whisper of any overt act attributable to the petitioner-advocate which could legitimately invite the rigour of penal provisions against him, the court said. </p>.Karnataka High Court refuses to quash case against man accused of rape by Instagram friend.<p>“This court is encountering a plethora of cases, where advocates, who merely represent parties before courts of law in the discharge of their professional obligations, are themselves being dragged into criminal proceedings and arrayed as accused. The only “fault” attributable to such advocates, is that they appeared for their clients and articulated their cause before the concerned judicial forum,” Justice Nagaprasanna said. </p>.<p>The court further admonished the complainant-officer for implicating the advocate. “This court deems it apposite to observe that any reiteration of such conduct in future, bereft of legal foundation, shall not only invite strict judicial scrutiny, but would also be viewed with utmost seriousness, for the dignity of legal profession and the sanctity of justice delivery system must remain inviolable.” </p>
<p>The High Court of Karnataka has quashed criminal proceedings against a Bengaluru-based advocate in a case initiated by a woman Assistant Conservator of Forests (ACF). </p>.<p>The advocate had represented two persons in a different case filed by the ACF. </p>.Karnataka High Court refuses to quash bribery case against assistant public prosecutor.<p>“If every advocate, merely by a reason of appearing for a litigant, is exposed to criminal prosecution and trauma of investigative proceedings, the inevitable consequence would be a chilling and paralysing effect upon fearless discharge of professional responsibilities. The majesty of the legal profession cannot be permitted to be diminished by disgruntled litigants to wield criminal law as a weapon of intimidation against the members of the bar,” Justice M Nagaprasanna said while allowing the petition filed by the advocate. </p>.<p>The ACF is involved in cases regarding her caste status while securing the job. Meanwhile, she also initiated a matrimonial case. The advocate represented two persons named by the officer in the matrimonial case. He filed an RTI application seeking certain information relating to the officer’s caste to place it before the family court. </p>.<p>Pursuant to this, the ACF filed a complaint against the advocate and others under BNS sections 336(2), 336(3) and 340 for forgery. She argued that the advocate wanted to know beyond what is necessary to be presented before the family court and hence the investigation should continue. </p>.<p>After perusing the complaint, the court noted that the advocate’s role in the entire episode of crime is appearing as counsel for two persons and procuring certain documents from the school, that too at the instance of his clients. There is not even a whisper of any overt act attributable to the petitioner-advocate which could legitimately invite the rigour of penal provisions against him, the court said. </p>.Karnataka High Court refuses to quash case against man accused of rape by Instagram friend.<p>“This court is encountering a plethora of cases, where advocates, who merely represent parties before courts of law in the discharge of their professional obligations, are themselves being dragged into criminal proceedings and arrayed as accused. The only “fault” attributable to such advocates, is that they appeared for their clients and articulated their cause before the concerned judicial forum,” Justice Nagaprasanna said. </p>.<p>The court further admonished the complainant-officer for implicating the advocate. “This court deems it apposite to observe that any reiteration of such conduct in future, bereft of legal foundation, shall not only invite strict judicial scrutiny, but would also be viewed with utmost seriousness, for the dignity of legal profession and the sanctity of justice delivery system must remain inviolable.” </p>