Supreme Court stays Allahabad HC order against two lawyers

The Supreme Court on Monday stayed the Allahabad High Court's order for criminal proceedings and disciplinary action against two advocates accused of filing a manipulated land acquisition award. The bench of Justice PK Mishra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar also stayed the direction to lodge complaints with the Bar Council of India and the State Bar Council seeking cancellation of the advocates' licences. The interim order was passed on a petition by advocate Shiv Kant Mishra, one of the accused. The matter will be heard next on October 12.

Supreme Court stays action against lawyers who fudged award copy

The Allahabad High Court, on July 30, had found that advocates Shiv Kant Mishra and Krishna Kant Mishra deliberately altered the contents of the award to secure higher interest for their client. The High Court had ruled that their conduct prima facie attracted perjury under Section 199 of the IPC. The Supreme Court has now stayed that order.

The dispute originated from a land acquisition matter where the Bareilly Development Authority (BDA) claimed the typed copy of the award attached to the landowners' petition wrongly showed interest at 9 percent for the first year and 15 percent thereafter, while the original award only stated interest payable 'as per rules'. The High Court had allowed the BDA's review petition and ordered action against the lawyers.

Indian Opinion Analysis

Both barandbench.com and livelaw.in report the same development neutrally, though barandbench focuses on the Supreme Court stay while livelaw.in covers a separate but related High Court ruling on a different case. The Supreme Court's interim stay does not decide the merits, only halts the High Court's action pending hearing. The core issue is whether a court can order disciplinary proceedings against lawyers for alleged document manipulation. The October 12 hearing will clarify the standard of proof required.

Coverage: 2 sources, 2 neutral


Sources (2): barandbench.com (neutral report), livelaw.in (neutral report)

This brief was synthesised by AI from the 2 sources linked above, so one read covers every framing they carry. Methodology and corrections.

Updated: this story now draws on 2 sources.

Ask their opinion on this story
They have read this article, our coverage, and the web.
AI simulations of historical figures. Responses are generated from the historical record, not authentic statements.

0 Votes: 0 Upvotes, 0 Downvotes (0 Points)

Share your opinion

Sign in to comment

Comments are open to readers with an Indian Opinion account. We email you a 6-digit code; there is no password.

Sign in to comment

Loading Next Post...
Search Trending
Ask their opinion
Loading

Signing-in 3 seconds...

Signing-up 3 seconds...

All fields are required.