- Apprentice Lawyer
- Legal Jobs
Notice was issued after the Delhi High Court directed the Bar Council to take necessary action against Singh for indulging in delay tactics.
Following a Delhi High Court direction to take necessary action against the counsel for Nirbhaya convict, Pawan Kumar Gupta, the Bar Council of Delhi has issued notice to Advocate AP Singh.
The High Court had passed the direction while dismissing Pawan’s plea to establish that he was a juvenile at the time of the commission of offence.
A Single Judge Bench of Justice Suresh Kumar Kait had concluded that the plea was filed only to delay the execution of the four convicts in the Nirbhaya gang rape case.
The matter was thereafter placed before the Bar Council of Delhi which issued a notice to AP Singh on January 18.
AP Singh has been directed to file his reply to the notice within two weeks from the receipt of the notice.
The Bar Council of Delhi has also requested the Registrar General, Delhi High Court to supply a copy of the vakalatnama filed in the matter to it.
Pawan's revision petition before the High Court had challenged a December 2018 order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala House Court dismissing the stand that he was a juvenile at the time of the commission of the offence. Pwaan had moved the plea before the Trial Court under section 7A Juvenile Justice Board (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000.
Pawan had relied upon his 'School Leaving Certificate' and mark sheet from his school in Ambedkar Nagar, Uttar Pradesh to prove that he was only 16 years 2 month and 8 days old on the date of the commission of the offence.
State opposed the revision petition on the ground that the issue of Pawan's juvenility had already been decided by the Supreme Court while dismissing his review petition in July 2018 and the present petition was merely a delay tactic.
Notably, Singh had also failed to appear before the High Court for the hearing in spite of several communications made to him.
The High Court also noted that revision petition was filed in April, 2009 but continued under objections as the counsel for Pawan did not even bother to remove the same and to list the matter before the court.
The Court had thus stated,
"..it seems that counsel for the petitioner was not interested to get the matter listed before the court, so that he may take benefit of the same at the appropriate time."
In view of the above, the Court had concluded as follows,
Concluding that AP Singh had "deliberately placed" the documents on record to linger on the final execution of the conviction order, the Court had dimsissed the revision petition with costs of Rs 25,000 on Singh for playing hide and seek with this Court.
The order was thereafter directed to be placed before Bar Council of Delhi for necessary action against AP Singh.
Pawan's petition against the Delhi High Court order was dismissed earlier today. During the hearing before the Supreme Court today, Singh had raised his grievance over the observations made in the High Court's judgment. The Apex Court, without expressing any opinion on the subject, granted liberty to Singh to approach the appropriate forum for raising the issue.
Read the Notice: