Chand Mehra Vs Union of India & Ors (Delhi High Court)
The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal filed by Chand Mehra, upholding the decisions of the Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) and the Bar Council of India (BCI) that an advocate is not obligated to verify the truthfulness of a client’s case before representing them. The appellant had filed a complaint against three lawyers, alleging professional misconduct for contesting a case on behalf of their clients that the appellant claimed was based on false information. Both the BCD and the BCI had previously dismissed this complaint, stating that the lawyers had no professional relationship with the appellant and that an advocate’s duty is to act on a client’s instructions, not to investigate their case.
The BCI, in its order, had specifically stated that an advocate cannot be prosecuted simply because their client’s case was found to be false. The council emphasized that advocates are not to be mere “mouthpieces” but are not required to determine the authenticity of a client’s claims before representation. The BCI relied on the Madras High Court judgment in R. Swaminathan v. Bar Council of Tamil Nadu, which supports the position that a lawyer’s role is not that of an investigator.
