COURSE MANUAL

PROFESSIONAL ETHICS &

BAR - BENCH RELATIONS
BA, LL.B. 2013-18
BBA LLB 2013-2018
LL.B 2015 - 18
Course Instructors
Mr. Faiz Tajuddin
Ms. Jhuma Sen
Ms. Natasha Nayak
Ms. Ruchika Rao
Mr. Vishavjeet Chaudhary
 Information on Professional Ethics offered by JGLS

Semester 10 in 2018 for B.A,LL.B (Hons.), and

Semester 6 in 2018 for LL.B

The information herein is provided by the Course Coordinator. This syllabus should be viewed as
a general guide and may be revised during the course of the semester.

Part I

Course title: Professional Ethics

Course Code:

Course Duration: One Semester

No. of Credit Units: 4

Level: BA LL.B.

Hours of Instruction: 5 hours per week

Medium of Instruction: English

Pre-requisites: Nil

Pre-cursors: Nil

Equivalent courses: Nil

Exclusive courses: Nil

Part II

A. Course description

This course will analyse the professional ethics as prescribed by the Bar Council of India, in
addition to covering critical readings in the area. The Course shall introduce (a) the regulation
of the legal profession as per the Advocates Act, 1961 and other statutes, and (b) the ethical
underpinning of legal rules. One module of the syllabus will also focus on Indian case laws as
well as global debates in the field of legal ethics so as to make the course comparative and
engaging.

B. Aims

At the end of the course, it is hoped that the students will:

(a) Have developed a critical understanding of issues inherent in the area of lawyers’
professional ethics and common scenarios in which they typically arise.
(b) Understand and apply the legal rights and duties of an advocate, judge or any participant
in legal profession.
(c) Developed an understanding of the practical issues in application of ethical obligations of
an advocate.
(d) Intelligently and constructively critique the legal and ethical rules.
(e) Negotiate the wider concept of ethics and lawyers’ role in the community in speech and
action.

C. Course Intended Learning Outcomes

Course Intended Learning Teaching and Learning Activities Assessment

Outcomes Tasks/Activities

1. Understand Professional Reading of Statutes, Rules, Case Semester -End

Ethics and Code of Laws and other theoretical material Examination (50% of
Conduct as prescribed marks). It may be
A. Students will acquire traditional 2 or 3 hours
by Bar Council of India.
knowledge of the perspectives written examination.
2. Understanding Laws pertaining to the topics to be
relating to Contempt of covered in the syllabus.
 Court. B. Preparation outside the class Research based
including library research. Assignments (15% of
3. Ability to analyse and marks). It may be on
critique the legal ethics any topic assigned by
in light of global
Research Assignments the faculty.
debates.
C. Students have to work on
research based assignments Seminar/ Tutorial (15%
on the assigned topic. of marks). It may be
based upon group study
consisting of 3-4
Seminars/ Tutorial students in one group.

D. Students will be expected to

debate the topics in light of the
readings. This will give them Viva Voce (20% of
a perspective as to the marks). It may include
readings and will also allow 10% marks for
them to develop their presentation of research
analytical skills, creativity and assignment individually
critical skills. by the student in the
class and 10% marks for
appraisal by the Board
of faculty members.
 D. GRADING OF STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT

To pass this course, students must obtain at least of 50% of the marks assigned for the coursework.
Coursework for this purpose means those ways in which students are assessed as outlined above.

Forty percent of the marks shall be assigned on the basis of a mid-semester examination. Both the
end-semester and the mid-semester examinations will be open book examinations whereby the
students will be tested more on their conceptual clarity rather than retention.

Ten percent of the course assessment shall be based on the student’s participation in the class
discussions. They shall be asked to do specific tasks like make case presentations, presentations
on specific topics etc.

The details of the grades as well as the criteria for awarding such grades are provided below.

Letter Percentage Grade Definitions

Grade Of marks
O 80% and above Outstanding Outstanding work
with strong
evidence of
knowledge of the
subject matter,
excellent
organizational
capacity, ability to
synthesize and
critically analyse
and originality in
thinking and
presentation.
A+ 75 to 79.75% Excellent Sound knowledge
of the subject
matter, thorough
understanding of
issues; ability to
synthesize
 critically and
analyse
A 70 to 74.75% Good Good
understanding of
the subject matter,
ability to identify
issues and provide
balanced solutions
to problems and
good critical and
analytical skills.
A- 65 to 69.75% Adequate Adequate
knowledge of the
subject matter to
go to the next level
of study and
reasonable critical
and analytical
skills.
B+ 60 to 64.75% Marginal Limited
knowledge of the
subject matter,
irrelevant use of
materials and poor
critical and
analytical skills.
B 55 to 59.75% Poor Poor
comprehension of
the subject matter;
poor critical and
analytical skills
and marginal use
of the relevant
materials.
B- 50 to 54.75% Pass “Pass” in a pass-
fail course. “P”
indicative of at
least the basic
understanding of
the subject matter.
F Below 50% Fail Fails in the subject

E. Plagiarism Policy

The students are informed that:-

 (a) The course instructor has access to the “Turnit in” that can detect plagiarism with a high
degree of accuracy.

(b) Unless otherwise instructed by the course instructor, any evidence of substantial copying
from internet, books, course materials, any other material or from any other student, or
reproduction without proper reference, in any form or manner in any the assignment,
examination or research paper shall immediately disqualify the work from evaluation.

(c) The course instructor retains the right to take further disciplinary action against the student
including debarring him/her from evaluation and reporting the matter to the Academic
Disciplinary Committee.

Disability Support and Accommodation Requirements:

JGU endeavors to make all its courses accessible to students. All students with a known
disability needing academic accommodations are required to register with the Disability
Support Committee dsc@jgu.edu.in. The Committee has so far identified the following
conditions that could possibly hinder student’s overall well-being. These include: physical and
mobility related difficulties; visual impairment; hearing impairment; medical conditions;
specific learning difficulties e.g. dyslexia; mental health.

The Disability Support Committee maintains strict confidentiality in its discussions. The students
should preferably register with the Committee in the month of June/January as disability
accommodation requires early planning. DSC will approve and coordinate all the disability related
services such as appointment of academic mentors, specialized interventions and course related
requirements such as accessible classrooms for lectures, tutorials and examinations.

Part III

1. KEYWORD SYLLABUS

Introduction to the area of legal ethics, adversarial system, lawyers and dignity, law and social
service and pro bono work, law and popular culture and literature, duty to defend and legal ethics,
defending the guilty, badgering of witnesses and introduction of evidence by lawyers, Regulation
of lawyers, Lawyers and fee structures, Amicus Curiae, Strikes by lawyers, Adjournments, Draft
professional ethics analysis, Analysing Indian Supreme Court case laws on professional
misconduct

2. SEMINAR/LECTURE PROGRAM
This has been outlined in the weekly teaching outline which clearly mentions the topics to be
covered in light of the readings provided. The following programme is intended to be only a guide
and is subject to variation as and when circumstances may render necessary. Additional readings
on contemporary topics will be provided in class.

Week Lecture topic

1. Understanding ‘virtue’ and its content.

2. Understanding different approaches to ethics and understanding the demands

of individual virtue as opposed to institutional virtue.

3. Critiquing Legal Education as a means for instilling professional ethics

4. Theoretical premise for lawyer-client relationship.

5. Bar Council of India Rules on Standards of Professional Ethics:

Duties: Duty to the court; Duty to the client; Duty to the opponent; Duty to
the colleagues; Duty in imparting training; Duty to render legal aid;
Restriction on other employments.

6. Discussion on duty continued.

7. Professional or Other Misconduct: Powers of the Disciplinary Committee of

the Bar Council of India, Procedure of complaints against Advocates,
Punishments for misconduct and Remedies against order of punishment

8. Regulation of lawyers. Exploring the way ahead for addressing malpractices

by lawyers on the lines of doctors.

9. Contempt of Court Act, Meaning and kinds of contempt, Defences available

to contemnor, Nature and extent of Punishment, Remedies available and
Contempt by Lawyers, Judges, State & Corporate bodies.

10. Adjournment
 11. Strike by the lawyers and constitutional position on it.

12. Right to Advertisement by lawyers

13. Contemporary debates relating to Bar and Bench relations.

14. Landmark cases related to malpractices by lawyers in India

Week 1

This week shall begin with developing an understanding of ‘virtue’ and questioning, if such an
understanding is possible. We shall be exploring the ‘content’ of ‘virtue’ in this week.

Compulsory Readings:

1. Plato’s Apology of Socrates (Could be retrieved from

http://www.sjsu.edu/people/james.lindahl/courses/Phil70A/s3/apology.pdf )
2. Plato’s Meno, translated by J. Holbo and B. Waring (Could be retrieved from
https://www.ma.utexas.edu/users/rgrizzard/M316L_SP12/meno.pdf )
Optional Reading:

1. Immanuel Kant’s Moral Philosophy (Could be retrieved from

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-moral/ )
 Week 2

In this week, we’ll attempt to explore if lawyers should pay any heed to the advice rendered by the
philosophers. It is the moral claims prescribed by the philosophers, which when taken as a central
premise, lead to a conception of ‘wrong-doing’ by lawyers. An attempt shall also be made to
assess, if philosophers are well placed to berate lawyers on moral grounds.

In the latter part of this week, we’ll attempt to explore the ‘institutional virtue’ for a lawyer rather
than focusing on the ‘individual virtue’. We’ll attempt to take the debate forward from a claim
exploring, ‘Can a good lawyer be a good person?’ to ‘Can a society with good lawyers be a good
society?’

Compulsory Readings:

1. M.B.E. Smith, ‘Should lawyers listen to Philosophers about Legal Ethics’, (1990), Law &
Philosophy, Vol. 9. No. 1, pp. 67 – 93

2. Alice Woolley, ‘If Philosophical Legal Ethics is the Answer, What is the Question’,
(2010), The University of Toronto Law Journal, Vol. 60, No. 4, pp. 983 – 1001

Week 3

In this week, we will look at the Law School Education critically, to appreciate possible linkages
between the structure and content of this education to the professional & moral forming of the
lawyers today.

Compulsory Readings:

1. Duncan Kennedy, ‘Legal Education as Training for Hierarchy’, in The Politics of Law (David
Kairys ed., Pantheon, 1998), (1st ed. 1982, 2nd ed. 1990, 3d. 1998), available at
http://duncankennedy.net/documents/Legal%20Education%20as%20Training%20for%20Hie
rarchy_Politics%20of%20Law.pdf
2. Lorie M. Graham, ‘Aristotle’s Ethics & Virtuous Lawyer’, (1996) 20 J. Legal Prof. 5, available
at https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=991661
Optional Reading:

1. Ipshita Sengupta, ‘Nurturing Caring Lawyers: Rethinking Professional Ethics &

Responsibility in India’, (2014) 5 J. Indian L. & Society 13, available at http://jils.ac.in/wp-
content/uploads/2014/12/Ipshita-Sengupta.pdf
2. Re: Regina Guha vs Unknown 1916 35 Ind Cas 925

Week 4

The fundamental theoretical premise for the lawyer-client relationship shall be laid down in this
week. Gandhi’s take on lawyer-client relationship shall be discussed in this week.

Compulsory Readings:

1. Charles Fried, ‘The Lawyer as a Friend: The Moral Foundations of the Lawyer-Client
Relation’, (1976), The Yale Law Journal, Vol. 85, No. 8, pp. 1060 -1089

2. Paul Lannon, ‘A Lawyer In Pursuit Of Truth and Unity: Mohandas Gandhi and the
Private Practice of Law’, (2011) 44 Suffolk U. L. Rev. 665.
Optional Readings:

1. Richard Wasserstrom, ‘Lawyers as Professionals: Some Moral Issues’, (1975), Human

Rights, Vol. 5, No. 1, pp. 1 – 24

Week 4 & Week 5:

Duties of lawyers towards the Clients, Courts, Opponents and Colleagues shall be explored during
these two weeks. Most of the competing values, including loyalty to the client, public interest,
access to justice, accountability, upholding the interest of justice, amongst others have been
crystallized into clear cut rules. In these two weeks, these competing values shall be assessed and
in view of it, rules laid down by the Bar Council of India shall be discussed and critiqued. Building
on the criticism, draft model rules drafted by the Bar Council of India shall also be taken up during
these two weeks.

Compulsory Reading:
 1. Deborah L. Rhode, ‘Legal Ethics in an Adversary System: The Persistent Questions’,
(2006), Hofstra Law Review, Vol. 34, pp. 641 – 671 (Could be retrieved from
http://www.hofstra.edu/pdf/law_lawrev_vol34no3_02.pdf )
2. Monroe Freedman, ‘Criminal responsibility of the Criminal Defense lawyer- three
hardest questions’ (1966) 64 Mich. L. Rev. 1469.
3. Bar Council of India Rules on Professional Standards and Etiquettes.
4. Draft Code of Ethics drafted by the Bar Council of India
5. Marc Galanter and Nick Robinson India's Grand Advocates: A Legal Elite Flourishing in
the Era of Globalization International Journal of the Legal Profession, Vol. 20, No. 3
(2013)

Optional Reading:

1. Barbara Babcock, ‘Duty to defend’ (2005) 114 Yale Law Journal 1489.
2. Bradley Wendel, ‘Should Law Schools Teach Professional Duties, Professional Virtues,
or Something Else? A Critique of the Carnegie Report on Educating Lawyers,’
University of St. Thomas Law Journal, Cornell Legal Studies Research Paper No. 11-32
(Could be retrieved from http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1963838 )

Week 6 and Week 7:

There is a growing mistrust in the society regarding the functioning of lawyers. This debate is not
restricted to any particular area but spills over to multiple fronts. The myth of self-regulation –
which was promoted with a view to creating an ethically driven legal institution, has led to
stagnation. The external regulators have always asserted on the importance of self-regulation and
self-regulation has, so far, never worked in case of India.

In the 6th Week, the existing Institutions and their structural framework shall be discussed, as given
under the Advocates Act of 1961. Questions such as: ‘Whether the regulators under the Advocates
Act, 1961 have effectively dealt with the problems related to regulations?’; ‘Whether self-
regulation of lawyers has worked out in India?’ shall be explored.

In the 7th Week, we’ll move ahead from ex-ante measures to ex-post measures. For other
professionals like doctors, in case of malpractices, there are multiple remedies spread out under
the penal code, the Consumer Protection Act and the law of torts. The case of lawyers shall be
taken up and contrasted with doctors, in order to ascertain if strong ex-post measures are required
in cases of malpractices.

Compulsory Readings:
 1. Fred C. Zacharias, ‘The Myth of Self-Regulations’, (2009), Minnesota Law Review, Vol.
93, pp. 1147 – 1190 (Could be retrieved from http://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-
content/uploads/2012/01/Zacharias_MLR.pdf )
2. Advocates Act of 1961
3. Gabriel J. Chin & Scott C. Wells, ‘Can a Reasonable Doubt have an Unreasonable Price?
Limitations on Attorneys’ Fee in Criminal Cases’, (2000), Boston College Law Review,
Vol. 41, Issue. 1, pp. 1 – 70
4. Chapter 5 on Fees and Retainers from Raju Ramachandran’s Professional Ethics for
Lawyers (Lexis Nexis), 2nd Edition, pp. 37 - 53
5. Indian Medical Association v. V. P. Shanta 1996 AIR 550 (Could be retrieved from
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/723973/ )
6. Jacob Mathew v. State of Punjab (2005) (Could be retrieved from
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/871062/ )
7. D. K. Gandhi v. M. Mathias (2007) (Could be retrieved from http://ncdrc.nic.in/RP139206.htm )
8. B. Sunitha vs State of Telangana available at http://www.livelaw.in/legal-ethics-sc-asks-govt-
consider-bringing-regulatory-mechanism-check-violation-ethics-lawyers-read-judgment/

Optional Readings:

1. Lester Brickman, ‘ABA Regulations of Contingency Fees: Money Talks, Ethics Walks’,
(1996), Fordham Law Review, Vol. 65, Issue. 1, pp. 247 – 235
2. David Wilkins, ‘Who should regulate lawyers?’ (1992) Vol. 105, No. 4 Harvard Law
Review 799-887.
3. The Bar Standards Board handbook for Barristers in England and Wales (Could be
retrieved from
https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/media/1663630/bsb_handbook_sept_2015.pdf )

Week 8

The majesty of law and efficient administration of justice lie at the heart of the power of contempt
by the High Courts and the Supreme Court. Although, the Indian Constitution accepts contempt
of courts as an acceptable restriction on liberty of speech and expressions, this power has lost its
legitimacy in the other jurisdictions, including United Kingdome and United States of America. In
this week, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 shall be dealt at length and the philosophy behind the
enactment of this statute.

The transgression by the Supreme Court in the domain of the Bar Councils in the name of
Contempt of Court shall also be discussed in this week. This interface shall be explored with a
view to ascertain if the Courts have the power to suspend the lawyers or that power lies within the
sacrosanct spheres of the Bar Councils.

Given its frequent misuse and vagueness in its definition, this statute shall also be critiqued.

Compulsory Readings:

1. Contempt of Courts Act, 1971

2. E. M. S. Namboodiripad v. T. Narayanan Nambiyar AIR 1970 SC 2015 (Could be
retrieved from http://indiankanoon.org/doc/625529/ )
3. In Re. V. C. Mishra AIR 1995 SC 2348 (Could be retrieved from
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/761887/)
4. Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India (1998) (Could be retrieved from
http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1666530/
5. V. Venkatesan, ‘What Constitutes Scandalising the Court?’ (May, 2001), Frontline, Vol.
18, Issue. 10 (Could be retrieved from
http://www.frontline.in/static/html/fl1810/18101020.htm )
6. Justice Markandey Katju, ‘Contempt of Court – Need for Second Look’, (Jan 22nd, 2007),
The Hindu (Could be retrieved from http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-
opinion/contempt-of-court-need-for-a-second-look/article1785785.ece )
7. Gautam Bhatia Offend, Shock, or Disturb: Free Speech under the Indian Constitution
Oxford University Press 2016

Optional Readings:

1. Law Commission of U.K. consultation paper no. 207 on ‘Contempt of Court –

Scandalising the Court’.
2. Shreya Singhal v. Union of India (2015), (Could be retrieved from
http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/FileServer/2015-03-24_1427183283.pdf )

Week 9

Frequent granting of adjournments has become order of the day, across courts in the country.
Granting of adjournments, without genuine cause, is seen as an antithesis to speedy justice. In
principle, arguments relating to fixing a cap on granting of adjournments and imposing a
reasonable cost (as opposed to meagre costs) exists but of no avail.

In this week, a brief introduction to adjournment will be given along with the rulings of the
Supreme Court on the topic. 240th Report of the Law Commission of India shall also be discussed
with a view to develop a sense of plight which frequent adjournments cause to the opposite party
besides delaying the entire process of justice.

Compulsory Readings:

1. M/s Shiv Cotex v. Tirgun Auto Plast Pvt. Ltd. & Ors (2011) 9 SCC 678
2. Ramrameshwari Devi v/s. Nirmala Devi (2011 (8) SCC 249 : 2011 (6) Scale 677)
3. 240th Report of the Law Commission of India (2012) (Original report could be retrieved
from http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/report240.pdf )

Week 10

Right to strike by lawyers is an oxymoronic phrase. The value of expressing dissent is not
frequently, but always, outweighed by the values of duty which lawyers have towards the clients
and the court.

It would be fallacious to call this even a ‘debate’ owing to consistency in approach of the Supreme
Court in not attributing any such right on the lawyers. On the contrary, Supreme Court has
expressed its desire to have regulations in place snubbing abuse of such practices.

In this week, a preliminary literature on ‘right to strike’ by lawyers shall be discussed. Interface of
different values at play and how their mutual interplay ensues in not having any right to strike by
lawyers, shall also be discussed.

Compulsory Readings:

1. Common Cause Society v. Union of India AIR 2004 SC 4442

2. Sriram Panchu, ‘When Lawyers Stay Away From Courts’, (19th June, 2013), The Hindu
(Could be retrieved at http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/when-lawyers-stay-away-
from-courts/article4827463.ece )
3. Follow up on the recent debate relating to dispute in pecuniary jurisdiction between the
Delhi High Court and the subordinate courts (A preliminary understanding could be
developed from the observation made by the division bench of the Supreme Court on 27 th
November, 2015 – could be retrieved from
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Lawyers-dont-have-the-right-to-go-on-strike-
SC/articleshow/49955588.cms )
4. http://www.epw.in/journal/2017/32/commentary/judicial-delays-mounting-arrears-and-
lawyers%E2%80%99-strikes.html
 5. Law Comission Report 266 available at
http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/Report266.pdf

Week 11

There is no right to advertisement by lawyers in India. This is governed by the Bar Council of
India Rules on Standard of Professional Conduct and Etiquette. The said rule suffers from the
infirmity of not accounting for plethora of factors and their mutual interplay, primary amongst
them being – liberty of expression, commitment not to fraud a client, offering transparent
information about services, change in positive morality about the legal profession per se.

The rules relating to advertisements have witnessed a symbolic shift in the other jurisdictions and
it is high time that Indian Bar also recognizes them.

This week, literature related to existing situation and a critical piece from Yale Law School Faculty
Scholarship Series shall be dealt, to make a positive case for right to advertisement in India.

Compulsory Readings:

1. Chapter 10 on Right to Advertise from Raju Ramachandran’s Professional Ethics for

Lawyers (Lexis Nexis), 2nd Edition, pp. 119 – 128
2. Bar Council of Maharashtra v. M.C. Dabholkar (1976) 2 SCC 291
3. Hazard Jr., Pearce and Stempel, ‘Why Should Lawyers Be Allowed to Advertise: A
Market Analysis of Legal Services’, (1983), Yale Law School Faculty Scholarship Series,
Paper 2398, (Could be retrieved from
http://digitalcommons.law.yale.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3296&context=fss_paper
s)

Week 12

There are other contemporary debates besieging Bar and Bench relationship. These include:

1. Ensuring that the best talent from the bar is appointed to the bench. Issues related to
attracting the best minds to bar and bench.
2. Entry of foreign law firms in India.
3. Role of senior counsels in the Indian Bar. Do we need to revisit the existing system?
4. Issues relating to promoting stronger exchanges between the bar and bench on one side
and legal academics on the other. Is the time right to initiate a conversation regarding
scrapping a rule which inhibits the legal academics from practicing in the courts?
Compulsory Readings:
 1. Follow up on the Supreme Court’s decision regarding permitting entry of foreign law
firms in India (A related news clip could be retrieved from
http://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court-decide-whether-foreign-law-firms-lawyers-
allowed-practice-india-final-hearing-scheduled-start-february-27-government-yet-make-
stand-clear/ )
2. Kales & Thayer, ‘Should the Law Teacher Practice Law’, (1912), Harvard Law Review,
Vol. 25, No. 3 pp. 253 – 273 (Could be retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1324911.pdf?acceptTC=true )
3. Advocates (Right to Take up Teaching Rules), 1979 (Could be retrieved from
http://ksbc.org.in/Advocate_Act/Advocate_act_Pg-113.aspx )
4. Chapter 7 on Senior Counsel from Raju Ramachandran’s Professional Ethics for Lawyers
(Lexis Nexis), 2nd Edition, pp. 75 – 79

Week 13 & 14

The Supreme Court has decided umpteen cases related to malpractices by lawyers. In the last two
weeks, an attempt shall be made to gauge and strike a continuity in the principles enunciated by
the apex court and to look for a way ahead by interpreting these principles contextually with the
readings from the previous weeks.

A thorough understanding of the apex court’s cases shall also offer a penetrative insight into the
deficiencies in the existing regulations and mull over the prospective solutions.

1. R.K. Anand v. Registrar, Delhi High Court (2009) 8 SCC 106

2. An Advocate v. Bar Council of India 1989 Supp (2) SCC 25
3. Salil Dutta v. T.M. and M.C. (P) Ltd. (1993) 2 SCC 185
4. State of Maharashtra v. Budhikota Subbarao (1993) 3 SCC 71
5. C. Ravichandran Iyer v. Justice A.M. Bhattacharjee (1995) 5 SCC 457
6. P.D. Gupta v. Ram Murti (1997) 7 SCC 147
7. T.C. Mathai v. District & Sessions Judge, Thiruvananthapuram (1999) 3 SCC 614
8. R.D. Saxena v. Balram Prasad Sharma (2000) 7 SCC 264
9. D.P. Chadha v. Triyugi Narain Mishra (2001) 2 SCC 221
10. Shambhu Ram Yadav v. Hanuman Das Khatry (2001) 6 SCC 1
11. Pravin C. Shah v. K.A. Mohd. Ali (2001) 8 SCC 650
12. Bhupinder Kumar Sharma v. Bar Assn., Pathankot (2002) 1 SCC 470
13. Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India (2003) 2 SCC 45