Gujarat High Court calls for thorough enquiry by State Bar Council into charges of bribery, court record tampering by lawyer

The Gujarat High Court on Wednesday allowed the Bar Council of Gujarat (BCG) to conduct an inquiry against advocate Dharmesh Jivanlal Gurjar, who allegedly tampered with records of the High Court to prevent a case against him from being listed [Dharmesh Jivanlal Gurjar v. State of Gujarat]..Gurjar was initially booked for demanding a ₹2 lakh bribe while acting as a court-appointed commissioner for the Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Ahmedabad. He had filed a petition in 2020 to quash the case against him.However, Justice Sandeep Bhatt on October 9 said that the High Court was not inclined to consider the plea, after which Gurjar sought to withdraw the same.The judge, however, had made it clear that the withdrawal would be accompanied with a direction to the BCG to initiate proceedings against the lawyer for professional misconduct..At that time, the matter was listed in the 'admission board' (fresh cases) on Justice Bhatt's roster. However, the judge noted that the records of the Court were tampered with, as the same matter was then posted as item number 200 in the 'final hearing board.'The judge had explained in his October 26 order that such mischief was done purposely to avoid a hearing, since the Court usually hears cases up to item number 70 in the daily list."This was nothing but clearly a mischief played by the individuals, who are interested to see that the matter cannot be heard on the date fixed by the Court as the Court had indicated to take some stringent view in the matter," the judge had said.Subsequently, the Registrar General of the High Court was ordered to conduct a proper inquiry to ascertain how the board of the bench was managed by removing the matter from the admission board to the final hearing board.A further direction was issued to the BCG to take a strict action against Gurjar for demanding a bribe and tampering with court records.Accordingly, the BCG on November 5 suspended Gurjar as it found a 'prima facie' case of misconduct on his part..When the matter was called out today, Senior Advocate Yatin Oza, who had appeared for Gurjar on November 1, informed the Bench that he has decided not to appear further in the case. "Welcome step. In fact, it is for you to think what precedent you want to set for budding advocates. Whether you want to give leverage to such malpractices," Justice Bhatt responded to Oza. An advocate appearing for the BCG told the Bench that a committee was constituted to conduct a detailed inquiry against Gurjar and other persons allegedly involved in the incidents. The counsel informed the Bench that the BCG has already suspended Gurjar and that it will take nearly six months to complete the probe..The judge then asked about the normal approach of the Bar Council in such matters where serious allegations are made against an advocate."Do you wait for this Court's orders or go about suo motu? See, there are very serious allegations of unethical practice against the advocate. So let there be a proper inquiry," the judge said.Justice Bhatt went on to describe the incident as 'shocking'."What is the propose of appointing junior advocates as court commissioners in DRT? It is to get them some remuneration. But what are they doing? Demanding bribes and then this tampering of records. This is very much shameful."The Bench further pointed out that there has been an allegation that the parties involved have 'influenced' the members of the BCG to get a favourable order."Whether you want to give out a message to the society that BCG isn't doing its duty or not? It is up to you. So decide this and act accordingly," the judge said.The BCG counsel then assured the Bench that a proper inquiry would be conducted and appropriate action will be initiated against those involved.The Bench, therefore, allowed the BCG to conduct an inquiry against Gurjar and others involved. It also allowed the BCG to scrutinise the call data records (CDRs) of all the persons involved in managing the records of the High Court..Addressing the petitioner's advocate-on-record, Justice Bhatt said,"This is a sensitive case and I have no option. Even I feel like this is a harsh action, but looking at the institution, I will have to do it. Such unethical practices needs to be stopped."While passing its order today, the Bench warned that all courts and tribunals across the State must ensure that their records aren't tampered with lest the public loses confidence in the judiciary..[Read Orders]