In Chandra Shekhar Soni v. Bar Council of Rajasthan (1983), the advocate had appeared for the…
The Court agreed that accepting the brief for the accused after appearing for the complainant "was clearly contrary to r. 33". It said representing conflicting interests is…
Choose your answer
In Chandra Shekhar Soni v. Bar Council of Rajasthan (1983), the advocate had appeared for the complainant in a criminal case and later accepted the brief of the accused in the same case. How did the Supreme Court view this?
Answer and explanation
Correct answer A
The Court agreed that accepting the brief for the accused after appearing for the complainant "was clearly contrary to r. 33". It said representing conflicting interests is unprofessional except with express consent after full disclosure. Considering his youth, it reduced his suspension from three years to one year.
Practice for these exams
-
All India Bar Examination (AIBE)
Subject revision
See pack details on LawMint.net -
IIT Kharagpur LL.M. Entrance
Subject revision
See pack details on LawMint.net -
CUET PG Law (LL.M.)
Subject revision