# Javed Ansari v. State of U.P. & Anr

- **Citation:** (2021) 8 ILRA 468
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2021-08-06
- **Case number:** Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 27194 of 2021
- **Bench:** Sanjay Kumar Singh
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/javed-ansari-v-state-of-u-p-anr-47232
- **Pages:** 4

## Headnote

(A) Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code,
1860
-
Sections
376(2)(i),
506
-
Protection
of
Children
from
Sexual
Offences Act - Section 3/4 - In the legal
field,
professional
ethics
are
a
fundamental requirement, because it is an
important tool that establishes rule of law
and keeps the legal profession and the
legal institutions on a high pedestal -
Vakalatnama is a valuable document in
legal
profession,
which
empowers
a
lawyer to act for or on behalf of his client -
confers wide authority/power upon a
lawyer - "Vakalatnama" must be beyond
the shadow of any doubt. (Para - 6,7)

Forged Vakalatnama has been filed on behalf of
informant/complainant to surreptitiously obtain
bail.

HELD :- Direction issued to place copy of this
order before Registrar General of this Court,
who shall forward the certified copy of this
order to the Chairman, Bar Council of Uttar
Pradesh for taking appropriate action/decision in
the matter in accordance with law. Copy of this
order be circulated to all the Hon'ble sitting
judges of this Court as well to the president,
Allahabad High Court Bar Association and
Advocates' association. This order, be placed by
the Registrar General before Hon'ble the Acting
Chief Justice for necessary directions in the
matter.
A
notice
be
issued
to
the
informant/opposite party No. 2, through Chief
Judicial Magistrate concerned, who will ensure
service of notice upon the informant/opposite
party No. 2.

Case be listed before the appropriate
Bench. (E-6)

## Text

468 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
directions/guidelines issued by the Director
General of Police, U.P. Lucknow, as
directed above, shall be communicated to
this Court through the Registrar General,
High Court Allahabad within eleven weeks.

Order on bail application

List this case on 02.09.2021 for
hearing the bail application of the applicant.
----------
(2021)08ILR A468
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 06.08.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE SANJAY KUMAR SINGH, J.

Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 27194 of
2021

Javed Ansari ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. & Anr. ...Opposite Parties

Counsel for the Applicant:
Sri Ram Ker Singh

Counsel for the Opposite Parties:
Sri Hausila Prasad

(A) Criminal Law - Indian Penal Code,
1860
-
Sections
376(2)(i),
506
-
Protection
of
Children
from
Sexual
Offences Act - Section 3/4 - In the legal
field,
professional
ethics
are
a
fundamental requirement, because it is an
important tool that establishes rule of law
and keeps the legal profession and the
legal institutions on a high pedestal -
Vakalatnama is a valuable document in
legal
profession,
which
empowers
a
lawyer to act for or on behalf of his client -
confers wide authority/power upon a
lawyer - "Vakalatnama" must be beyond
the shadow of any doubt. (Para - 6,7)

Forged Vakalatnama has been filed on behalf of
informant/complainant to surreptitiously obtain
bail.

HELD :- Direction issued to place copy of this
order before Registrar General of this Court,
who shall forward the certified copy of this
order to the Chairman, Bar Council of Uttar
Pradesh for taking appropriate action/decision in
the matter in accordance with law. Copy of this
order be circulated to all the Hon'ble sitting
judges of this Court as well to the president,
Allahabad High Court Bar Association and
Advocates' association. This order, be placed by
the Registrar General before Hon'ble the Acting
Chief Justice for necessary directions in the
matter.
A
notice
be
issued
to
the
informant/opposite party No. 2, through Chief
Judicial Magistrate concerned, who will ensure
service of notice upon the informant/opposite
party No. 2.

Case be listed before the appropriate
Bench. (E-6)

(Delivered by Hon'ble Sanjay Kumar
Singh, J.)

 1- Today, when the case is taken up,
Mr. Ram Ker Singh, learned counsel,
(Enrollment No. UP 4309 of 1980,
Advocate
Roll
No.
A/R0784/2012,
Chamber No. 9. Tribhuwan Upadhyay Hall
IInd Floor, High Court Allahabad, Mobile
Nos. 9451302056 and 9807344717), has
appeared in this case on behalf of the
applicant, whereas Mr. Hausila Prasad,
learned Advocate, (Enrollment No. UP
3754/1994,Advocate
Roll
No.
A/H
0127/2012,
Mobile
No.
9450704504,
Chamber No. 9, Tribhuvan Upadhyay Hall
IInd Floor, High Court, Allahabad, resident
of 475 Rajapur, near police booth,
Prayagraj, 211001) has appeared on behalf
of opposite party No. 2/informant, Gurdeep
Verma,
who
is
father
of
the
victim/prosecutrix aged about 15 years.
8 All. Javed Ansari Vs. State of U.P. & Anr.
469

2- Learned counsel for the applicant
after advancing his argument at some
length, stated that Mr. Hausila Prasad,
learned
counsel
for
the
informant/complainant
also
has
no
objection in granting bail to the applicant.
On being enquired by this Court, Mr.
Hausila Prasad, learned Advocate did not
oppose the submissions of learned Counsel
for the applicant. In the meantime, Mr.
Vivek Kumar Singh, learned Advocate
(Enrollment No. A/V-0571/2012, U.P.B.C.
No.
2590
of
1998,
Mobile
No.
9412207892) appeared in this case and by
raising a preliminary objection, apprised
the Court that in fact only he has the
instructions
on
behalf
of
informant,
Gurdeep
Verma
S/o
Heman
Verma,
resident of Mohalla Sarai Gosain, police
station Kotwali City, district Bulandshahr
and not Mr. Hausala Prasad, Acvocate, who
has filed forged Vakalatnama on behalf of
the informant. He also pointed out that Mr.
Hausila Prasad, Advocate has filed his
Vakalatnama on 26th of July, 2021 through
E-mode in collusion with Mr. Ram Ker
Singh, learned counsel for the applicant
only to obtain bail by hook or crook and in
fact the said Vakalatnama is a forged
document, whereas the fact is that the
informant/complainant, Gurdeep Verma
has not engaged him.

3- When Mr. Hausila Prasad was
confronted with the submissions of Mr.
Vivek Kumar Singh, Advocate that he has
instructions
on
behalf
of
the
informant/complainant,
Mr.
Hausila
Prasad, learned Advocate stated at the bar
that the said Vakalatnama has been
provided to him by Mr. Ram Ker Singh,
learned counsel for the applicant. It is also
submitted by Mr. Hausila Prasad that he is
associated with Mr. Ram Ker Singh,
learned counsel appearing for the applicant.
It is further submitted that his fee to appear
in this case on behalf of the informant has
also been given by Mr. Ram Ker Singh,
learned counsel for the applicant. He was
engaged by Mr. Ram Ker Singh, for the
reason that the Hon'ble Court may not issue
the notices to the informant/complainant,
Gurdeep Verma and victim of this case,
because the present matter pertains to
offence under Section 376(2)(i), 506 IPC
and 3/4 Protection of Children from Sexual
Offences Act, registered as Case Crime No.
434 of 2021 at police station Kotwali
Nagar, district Bulandshahr and grant bail
to the applicant.

4- From the aforesaid statements made
by Mr. Hausila Prasad, learned Advocate at
the bar, who has appeared in this case on
behalf of informant/complainant, it is
ostensibly clear that forged Vakalatnama
has
been
filed
on
behalf
of
informant/complainant to surreptitiously
obtain bail. Hard copy of the aforesaid
"Vakalatnama" in question is made part of
the record.

5- At this stage, Mr. Hausila Prasad
learned
counsel
has
tendered
his
unconditional apology by stating that in
future he will take care of such things and
will not repeat such mistake in future and
also stated that he wants to withdraw his
aforesaid Vakalatnama, whereas Mr. Ram
Ker Singh, learned counsel did not tender
his apology and stated at the bar that it is
not a new thing but it is a common practice
in the High Court. This statement of
Mr.Ram Ker Singh advocate is very
shocking and painful to the conscious
which creates a stir compelling one to
ponder over the matter. The conduct of Mr.
Ram Ker Singh and Mr. Hausila Prasad,
Advocates who are having a long standing
experience of more than 40 years and 26
470 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
years of the practice respectively, is highly
deplorable.
This
Court
denounces/condemns the conduct of both
the Advocates as they made effort to
tarnish the image of noble profession of
advocacy.

6- It is very painful to see the downfall
in moral values of noble legal profession.
In the legal field, professional ethics are a
fundamental requirement, because it is an
important tool that establishes rule of law
and keeps the legal profession and the legal
institutions on a high pedestal. In the legal
profession, in order to maintain the sanctity
of faith between the Bar and the Bench,
ethics are important factor, which contains
the elements of discipline, fairness, trust,
moral values, help to colleagues, respect
and
responsibilities,
etc.
It
creates
confidence between the Bar and the Bench.
Lawyers play a crucial role in justice
delivery
system
and
in
my
view,
professional ethics are the back bone of
legal profession, which is self regulating
profession and it is moral duty of the Bar
and the Bench both to maintain the sanctity
of legal profession and the institution.

7-
Vakalatnama
is
a
valuable
document in legal profession, which
empowers a lawyer to act for or on behalf
of his client. Sometimes it confers wide
authority/power upon a lawyer, therefore in
the opinion of this Court, "Vakalatnama"
must be beyond the shadow of any doubt.

8- Since, Mr. Hausila Prasad learned
advocate realizing his mistake has accepted
his guilt before the Court, therefore, this
Court is not taking any action against him
and on his request, he is permitted to move
an appropriate application to withdraw his
Vakalatnama from this case, whereas Mr.
Ram Ker Singh, learned counsel for the
applicant,
who
had
provided
forged
Vakalatnama of the informant and had also
given fee to Mr. Hausila Prasad, as per
disclosure made by him, neither tendered
an oral apology nor did he feel regret on his
conduct. Under the facts and circumstances
of the case, this Court can not act as a silent
spectator and has no option left, except to
refer the issue of filing the forged
Vakalatnama of the informant as mentioned
above to the Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh
for taking appropriate action/decision in the
matter.

9- The issue of filing a forged
Vakalatnama of any person in a Court
proceeding is not a small one but it is
serious issue, because it may adversely
affect the valuable legal right and interest
of the persons/litigants concerned, ergo
keeping in view, the larger interest of the
litigants/victims,complainants or aggrieved
persons specially in criminal matters and
members of the bar, who believe in
professional ethics, this Court feels that
now it is high time to adopt some remedial
measures, so the litigants or aggrieved
persons are not deprived of their legal
rights. This Court proposes that along with
Vakalatnama, self attested copy of any
identity proof (preferably Aadhar Card)
mentioning mobile number of the person
concerned should also be filed or any other
method may be adopted in the interest of
litigants and the institution.

10- In view of above, the following
directions are issued:-

(i)-Let a copy of this order be
placed before the Registrar General of this
Court within a week, who shall forward the
certified copy of this order to the
Chairman, Bar Council of Uttar Pradesh
within two weeks thereafter for taking
8 All. Aslam Vs. State of U.P.
471
appropriate action/decision in the matter in
accordance with law.

(ii)-The copy of this order be
circulated to all the Hon'ble sitting judges
of this Court as well to the president,
Allahabad High Court Bar Association and
Advocates' association.

(iii)-The aforesaid proposal as
mentioned in paragraph no. 9 of this order,
be placed by the Registrar General before
Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice for
necessary directions in the matter.

(iv)-A notice be issued to the
informant/opposite party No. 2, Gurdeep
Verma through Chief Judicial Magistrate
concerned, who will ensure service of
notice upon the informant/opposite party
No. 2 and submit report by the next date
fixed in the matter.

11- Let this case be listed on 7th of
September, 2021 before the appropriate
Bench.
----------
(2021)08ILR A471
APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 06.08.2021

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE NAVEEN SRIVASTAVA, J.

Criminal Misc. Ist Bail Application No. 27936 of
2021

Aslam ...Applicant
Versus
State of U.P. ...Opposite Party

Counsel for the Applicant:
Sri Ramesh Kumar

Counsel for the Opposite Party:
A.G.A.

A.
Criminal
Law-Code
of
Criminal
Procedure,1973-Section 439 & Narcotics
Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act,
1985-Section 8/20-application-rejection1.5
kg
charas
recovered
from
the
applicant possession which is more than
commercial
quantity
and
he
was
apprehended from the spot-more so,
applicant had been involved in four cases
of same nature-no enmity between the
applicant and police-false implication is a
stereotyped
defence
raised
by
the
applicant. (Para 1 to 14).

B. The scheme of the section 37 reveals
that the exercise of power to grant bail is
not
only
subject
to
the
limitations
contained u/s 439 of the Cr.P.C., but is
also subject to the limitation placed by
section 37 which commences with nonobstante clause. The operative portion of
the said section is in negative form
prescribing the enlargement of bail to any
person accused of commission of an
offence
under
the
act,
unless
twin
conditions are satisfied. the first condition
is that the prosecution must be given an
opportunity to oppose the application; and
the second, is that the Court must be
satisfied
that
there
are
reasonable
grounds for believing that he is not guilty
of such offence. if either of these two
conditions is not satisfied, the ban for
granting bail operates.(Para 6 to 8)

The application is rejected. (E-5)

List of Cases cited:

1. St. of Ker. Vs. Rajesh (2020) AIR SC 721

(Delivered by Hon'ble Naveen Srivastava, J.)

1. Heard learned counsel for the
applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and
perused the record.

2. By means of this application the
applicant who is involved in Case Crime