Site navigation

In Bar Council of Maharashtra v. M.V. Dabholkar (1975), a seven-judge Bench of the Supreme Court…

The Court held that a State Bar Council is an "aggrieved person" entitled to maintain an appeal under the Act, reading the words widely in the light of the Council's role in…

Choose your answer

In Bar Council of Maharashtra v. M.V. Dabholkar (1975), a seven-judge Bench of the Supreme Court considered an appeal filed by a State Bar Council under section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961. What did it hold?

Select one answer
Answer and explanation

Correct answer A

The Court held that a State Bar Council is an "aggrieved person" entitled to maintain an appeal under the Act, reading the words widely in the light of the Council's role in disciplinary matters. It refused a narrow reading limited to the denial of legal rights or financial interests. The case arose from a charge that advocates had solicited work at the entrance of a court house.

Practice for these exams

Related exam syllabi

Related questions in this topic