The Allahabad High Court was recently shocked and dismayed to discover two lawyers complicit in forging complainant's vakalatnama in order to obtain bail for the accused in the POCSO case. The High expressed shock and pain after the lawyer refused to tender an apology, stating that "it is not a new thing but a common practise in the High Court." (Javed Ansari v. Uttar Pradesh) Justice Sanjay Kumar Singh went on to say that the vakalatnama is a crucial document in the legal profession since it authorises a lawyer to work for or on behalf of his client, and as such, it should be flawless. The Court stated that the filing of a forged 'Vakalatnama' is not a minor matter, but rather a serious matter that jeopardises litigants' valuable legal rights and interests.
Accordingly, the Court has proposed that, in addition to the Vakalatnama, a self-attested copy of any identity proof (preferably an Aadhar Card) containing the person's mobile number be filed. The judge has ordered that this proposition be presented to the Acting Chief Justice for approval. The complainant accused Singh's client of violating the Indian Penal Code (IPC) Sections 376(2)(i) (rape within the police station) and 506 (criminal intimidation), as well as the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act's charge of penetrative sexual assault. The Court denounced both lawyers' actions, calling them an attempt to smear the legal profession's reputation. Prasad apologised orally in front of the Court and stated that he will not make the same mistakes again.
Advocate Singh, on the other hand, was unapologetic, claiming that such a practise is nothing new and is customary in the High Court. The Court took no punishment against Prasad because he realised his error and admitted his guilt. Prasad was also allowed to file a proper application to retract his Vakalatnama at his request. In the matter of the POCSO bail application, the Court ordered that notice be issued to the complainant through the appropriate Chief Judicial Magistrate. On September 7, the case will be heard again.
Tags : #ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT #VAKALATNAMA #ADVOCATE #BAR COUNCIL OF UTTAR PRADESH #STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH #FORGING VAKALATNAMA