{"id":228242,"date":"2001-10-31T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2001-10-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001"},"modified":"2016-01-07T16:18:34","modified_gmt":"2016-01-07T10:48:34","slug":"bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001","title":{"rendered":"Bhupinder Kumar Sharma vs Bar Association Pathankot on 31 October, 2001"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Bhupinder Kumar Sharma vs Bar Association Pathankot on 31 October, 2001<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: S V Patil<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: D.P. Mohapatra, Shivaraj V. Patil<\/div>\n<pre>           CASE NO.:\nAppeal (civil) 6304  of  1998\n\n\n\nPETITIONER:\nBHUPINDER KUMAR SHARMA\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nBAR ASSOCIATION PATHANKOT\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t31\/10\/2001\n\nBENCH:\nD.P. Mohapatra &amp; Shivaraj V. Patil\n\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>SHIVARAJ V. PATIL J.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe appellant has filed this appeal, under Section 38 of<br \/>\nThe Advocates Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act)<br \/>\nagainst the judgment and order dated 4.11.1998 passed by the<br \/>\nDisciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India, confirming<br \/>\nthe order passed by the Disciplinary Committee of Bar Council of<br \/>\nPunjab &amp; Haryana removing the name of the appellant from the<br \/>\nStates Roll of Advocates under Section 35(3)(d) of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tThe appellant was enrolled with the State Bar Council as an<br \/>\nAdvocate on 16.9.1994 vide enrolment No. P\/771\/94.  On 9.9.1995,<br \/>\nthe respondent-association made a written complaint to the State<br \/>\nBar Council making allegations of misconduct against the<br \/>\nappellant.  The State Bar Council took cognizance of the<br \/>\ncomplaint and referred the complaint to its Disciplinary<br \/>\nCommittee.  After the completion of the proceedings in D.C.E. No.<br \/>\n1\/1996, order was passed by the Disciplinary Committee of State<br \/>\nBar Council to remove the name of the appellant from the State<br \/>\nRoll of the Advocates and the same was confirmed by the<br \/>\nDisciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India, in appeal.<br \/>\nHence, this appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>The learned senior counsel for the appellant strongly<br \/>\ncontended that the allegations made in the complaint were not<br \/>\nestablished or proved, judged by the standard of proof required<br \/>\nin a case like this; the appellant was not actually carrying on<br \/>\nbusiness and the evidence on this point was not properly<br \/>\nappreciated; at any rate, the punishment imposed on the appellant<br \/>\nis grossly disproportionate even assuming that the misconduct was<br \/>\nproved.\n<\/p>\n<p>Per contra, the learned senior counsel for the respondent<br \/>\nmade submissions supporting the impugned order.\t He drew our<br \/>\nattention to the evidence brought on record to show how the<br \/>\nfindings recorded against the appellant are justified.\tHe also<br \/>\nstrongly contended that the misconduct of the appellant before<br \/>\nand even after filing of the appeals before the Bar Council of<br \/>\nIndia and this Court in continuing the business cannot be<br \/>\ncondoned; further in spite of giving undertaking before this<br \/>\nCourt, he is still continuing his business as is supported by the<br \/>\nreport of the Sub-judge made to this Court.  According to him,<br \/>\nthe punishment imposed on the appellant is proper in the absence<br \/>\nof any good ground to take any lenient view.\n<\/p>\n<p>We have carefully considered these submissions.\n<\/p>\n<p>The complaint contained allegations of misconduct against<br \/>\nthe appellant for the period prior to the date of enrolment as an<br \/>\nAdvocate and also subsequent to his enrolment.\tSince the<br \/>\nDisciplinary Committee of the State Bar Council did not go into<br \/>\nthe allegations of misconduct pertaining to the period prior to<br \/>\nthe date of enrolment, it is unnecessary to refer to them.\n<\/p>\n<p>According to the complainant, the appellant was guilty of<br \/>\nprofessional misconduct as he was carrying on and continued his<br \/>\nbusiness and business activities even after his enrolment as an<br \/>\nAdvocate, stating thus:-\n<\/p>\n<p>(i)\tHe was running a photocopier documentation center in the<br \/>\ncourt compound, Pathankot, and the space for the same was<br \/>\nallotted to the appellant in his personal capacity on<br \/>\naccount of his being handicap;\n<\/p>\n<p>(ii)\tHe was running a PCO\/STD booth which was allotted in his<br \/>\nname from the P&amp;T Department under handicap quota;\n<\/p>\n<p>(iii)He was proprietor\/General Manager of the Punjab Coal<br \/>\nBriquettes, Pathankot, a private concern and he was<br \/>\npursuing the business\/his interest in the said business<br \/>\neven on the date when his statement was recorded by the<br \/>\nDisciplinary Committee on 12.5.1996.\n<\/p>\n<p>The defence of the appellant was that although he was<br \/>\nrunning business prior to his enrolment, he did not continue the<br \/>\nsame after his enrolment as an Advocate and he ceased to have any<br \/>\nbusiness interest, and that it is his father and brother who were<br \/>\ncarrying on the business after he became an Advocate under some<br \/>\noral arrangement.  The Disciplinary Committee of the State Bar<br \/>\nCouncil, after considering the evidence placed on record both<br \/>\noral and documentary, recorded a finding that the appellant was<br \/>\nguilty of professional misconduct in carrying on business in the<br \/>\naforementioned concerns even after his enrolment as an Advocate<br \/>\nand passed order to remove his name from the States Roll of<br \/>\nAdvocates under Section 35(3)(d) of the Act and debarred him from<br \/>\npractising as an Advocate.  The Disciplinary Committee of the Bar<br \/>\nCouncil of India, in the appeal filed by the appellant on re-<br \/>\nappreciation of the material on record, concurred with the<br \/>\nfinding recorded by the Disciplinary Committee of the State Bar<br \/>\nCouncil and held that the appellant was guilty of professional<br \/>\nmisconduct and that the punishment imposed on him debarring the<br \/>\nappellant from practising for all time was just.  Hence,<br \/>\ndismissed the appeal.\n<\/p>\n<p>In the impugned order, it is also noticed that the<br \/>\nappellant submitted his application form for enrolment. Column<br \/>\nNo. 12 of the application form reads:-\n<\/p>\n<p>12.\t Whether or not applicant engaged or<br \/>\nhas ever been engaged in any trade, business or<br \/>\nprofession, if so the nature of such trade,<br \/>\nbusiness\/profession and the place where it is<br \/>\nor was carried on.  The answer submitted by<br \/>\nappellant advocate is as under:\n<\/p>\n<p>No, not applicable.\n<\/p>\n<p>According to the Disciplinary Committee of Bar council of<br \/>\nIndia, the appellant had not only procured enrolment by<br \/>\nsubmitting the false declaration but also suppressed the material<br \/>\nfact; otherwise the appellant would not have been enrolled at<br \/>\nall.  In the said order, it is further stated that as a matter of<br \/>\nfact, besides it being the case of misconduct, it is also a case<br \/>\nwhere the name of the appellant could be removed for suppressing<br \/>\nthe material fact; anyhow since the reference had not been made<br \/>\nfor the same, it is left open to the State Bar Council to take<br \/>\nsuch action under Section 26 of the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>CW-1, Shri Manohar Lal, Senior Telecommunication Office<br \/>\nAssistant, has deposed that STD\/PCO has been allotted to<br \/>\nappellant on 6.4.1992 in the handicap quota and the same is<br \/>\ncontinuing in the name of the appellant as per the record even<br \/>\nafter his enrolment as an Advocate; no intimation was given by<br \/>\nthe appellant to the Department to transfer STD\/PCO in the name<br \/>\nof his brother Satish Mohan. CW-3, Shri Vipin Tripathi, a clerk<br \/>\nin the office of S.D.O. in his evidence has stated that space for<br \/>\nkiosk for installation of photocopy machine on payment of Rs.<br \/>\n120\/- per month, was allotted on lease basis on 6.5.1991 by Dy.<br \/>\nCommissioner, Gurdaspur, to the appellant in handicap quota;<br \/>\nthere was no intimation to change lease in favour of anybody and<br \/>\nthere is no transfer of lease in favour of any other person; the<br \/>\nlease amount is paid even after appellants enrolment as an<br \/>\nAdvocate in his name.  CW-3, H.S. Pathania, in his evidence has<br \/>\nsupported the allegations made in the complaint.  The appellant<br \/>\nin his evidence has stated that he has no concern with the<br \/>\nbusiness of STD\/PCO and Photostat machine.  RW-2, Satish Mohan,<br \/>\nthe brother of the appellant has stated that he has no<br \/>\narrangement with the appellant regarding PCO. In his cross-<br \/>\nexamination he has admitted that he is still in the service of<br \/>\nsugar mills, Dasuya.  Hence, it was rightly concluded that<br \/>\nSTD\/PCO business is being run by the appellant himself even after<br \/>\nbecoming an Advocate.  RW-3, Shri Puran Chand Sharma, the father<br \/>\nof the appellant in his evidence has admitted that the appellant<br \/>\nis having his office in the same cabin where photocopier machine<br \/>\nis installed.\tIn the evidence led on behalf of the complainant,<br \/>\nit is stated that the site of kiosk for running the photostat<br \/>\nbusiness is still in the name of the appellant and lease money is<br \/>\nalso being paid by the appellant and in the absence of the<br \/>\nappellant giving intimation to the Department\/authorities<br \/>\nconcerned regarding handing over of business to Shri Puran Chand<br \/>\nSharma or Satish Mohan, the assertion regarding the oral<br \/>\nagreement was not believed by the Disciplinary Committee of the<br \/>\nState Bar Council and rightly so in our opinion.  The<br \/>\nDisciplinary Committee of the State Bar Council in its order has<br \/>\nobjectively considered the evidence brought on record.\tAs<br \/>\nalready stated above, the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar<br \/>\nCouncil of India on re-appreciation of the evidence has concurred<br \/>\nwith the findings recorded by the Disciplinary Committee of the<br \/>\nState Bar Council based on oral and documentary evidence.\n<\/p>\n<p>Having perused both the orders and the evidence placed on<br \/>\nrecord, we are of the view that the finding recorded holding the<br \/>\nappellant guilty of professional misconduct is supported by and<br \/>\nbased on cogent and convincing evidence even judged by the<br \/>\nstandard required to establish misconduct as required to prove a<br \/>\ncharge in a quasi criminal case beyond reasonable doubt.  We do<br \/>\nnot find any merit in the argument that the misconduct alleged<br \/>\nagainst the appellant was not properly proved by the standard<br \/>\nrequired to prove such a misconduct.  There is also no merit in<br \/>\nthe contention that the evidence was not properly appreciated by<br \/>\nboth the Disciplinary Committees; nothing was brought on record<br \/>\nto discredit the evidence led on behalf of the complainant and no<br \/>\nmaterial was placed to support the allegation of the appellant<br \/>\nthat the members of the respondent-Association had any grudge or<br \/>\nill-will against the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>It is to be further noticed that this Court on 26.2.1999<br \/>\npassed the following order:-\n<\/p>\n<p>Learned counsel for the appellant wants to<br \/>\nfile an affidavit in the form of an undertaking<br \/>\nthat the petitioner is not personally engaging<br \/>\nhimself in any of the family businesses.\n<\/p>\n<p>Adjourned for two weeks.\n<\/p>\n<p>Pursuant to the said order, the appellant has filed<br \/>\naffidavit\/undertaking.\tPara 3 of the affidavit\/ undertaking<br \/>\nreads:-\n<\/p>\n<p>I state on oath before this Honble Court that<br \/>\nsince the day of my enrolment as an Advocate, I<br \/>\nhave not engaged myself in any business except<br \/>\nmy practice of law as an Advocate and I<br \/>\nundertake before this Honble Court that I<br \/>\nshall not ever engage either actively or<br \/>\notherwise, in any other business or profession<br \/>\nwhile I continue my enrolment as an Advocate.\n<\/p>\n<p>The order made by this Court on 2.9.1999 reads:-\n<\/p>\n<p>Mr. Sudhir Walia, learned counsel appearing<br \/>\nfor the Bar Association, Pathankot placed<br \/>\nbefore us the photographs of the cabin where<br \/>\nthe photocopying machine is installed.\tThe<br \/>\nphotograph discloses the name board of the<br \/>\npetitioner and also an inscription in Punjabi<br \/>\nlanguage Bhupindra Photostat Centre.  The<br \/>\nlearned counsel appearing for the Bar<br \/>\nAssociation, Pathankot says that these<br \/>\nphotographs placed before us have been taken<br \/>\nyesterday only.\t It is contended that,<br \/>\ntherefore, the undertaking filed in this Court<br \/>\nthat the petitioner was not conducting any<br \/>\nbusiness in his name, could not be accepted.<br \/>\nThis fact is disputed by learned senior counsel<br \/>\nappearing for the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n<p>We are, therefore, constrained to call for a<br \/>\nreport from the learned Sub-Judge at Pathankot<br \/>\nas to whether the cabin in which the<br \/>\nphotocopying machine is installed contains,<br \/>\napart from the name board of the petitioner an<br \/>\ninscription Bhupindra Photostat Centre and<br \/>\nwhether such inscription was there till<br \/>\nyesterday and is continuing as of today.  The<br \/>\nlearned Sub-Judge shall also furnish the<br \/>\ndetails regarding the allotment of the place<br \/>\nwithin the Court compound wherein this cabin<br \/>\nhas been put up.  The report will be submitted<br \/>\nwithin four weeks from today.  A copy of this<br \/>\norder will be sent to the learned Sub-Judge at<br \/>\nPathankot today itself.\n<\/p>\n<p>List the matter after the report from the<br \/>\nlearned Sub-Judge at Pathankot is received.\n<\/p>\n<p>Pursuant to the same, the Sub-judge submitted a report,<br \/>\nwhich also goes against the appellant.\n<\/p>\n<p>We are unable to say that the concurrent finding recorded<br \/>\nby both the Disciplinary Committees against the appellant as to<br \/>\nhis professional misconduct, is a finding based on no evidence or<br \/>\nis based on mere conjuncture and unwarranted inference. Hence,<br \/>\nthe same cannot be disturbed.\n<\/p>\n<p>What remains to be seen is whether the punishment imposed<br \/>\non the appellant is grossly disproportionate.  Having regard to<br \/>\nthe nature of misconduct and taking note of the handicap of the<br \/>\nappellant, in our opinion, debarring him from practising for all<br \/>\ntime is too harsh.  We consider it just and appropriate to modify<br \/>\nthe punishment to debar the appellant from practising upto end of<br \/>\nDecember, 2006.\t Except the modification of punishment as stated<br \/>\nabove, the impugned order remains undisturbed in all other<br \/>\nrespects.  The appeal is disposed of in the above terms.  No<br \/>\ncosts.\n<\/p>\n<p>&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..J.\n<\/p>\n<p>[D.P. Mohapatra]<\/p>\n<p>&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..J.\n<\/p>\n<p>[Shivaraj V. Patil]<\/p>\n<p>October 31, 2001.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India Bhupinder Kumar Sharma vs Bar Association Pathankot on 31 October, 2001 Author: S V Patil Bench: D.P. Mohapatra, Shivaraj V. Patil CASE NO.: Appeal (civil) 6304 of 1998 PETITIONER: BHUPINDER KUMAR SHARMA Vs. RESPONDENT: BAR ASSOCIATION PATHANKOT DATE OF JUDGMENT: 31\/10\/2001 BENCH: D.P. Mohapatra &amp; Shivaraj V. Patil JUDGMENT: SHIVARAJ V. [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-228242","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.6 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Bhupinder Kumar Sharma vs Bar Association Pathankot on 31 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bhupinder Kumar Sharma vs Bar Association Pathankot on 31 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2001-10-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2016-01-07T10:48:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Bhupinder Kumar Sharma vs Bar Association Pathankot on 31 October, 2001\",\"datePublished\":\"2001-10-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-07T10:48:34+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001\"},\"wordCount\":2089,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001\",\"name\":\"Bhupinder Kumar Sharma vs Bar Association Pathankot on 31 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2001-10-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2016-01-07T10:48:34+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bhupinder Kumar Sharma vs Bar Association Pathankot on 31 October, 2001\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bhupinder Kumar Sharma vs Bar Association Pathankot on 31 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bhupinder Kumar Sharma vs Bar Association Pathankot on 31 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2001-10-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2016-01-07T10:48:34+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Bhupinder Kumar Sharma vs Bar Association Pathankot on 31 October, 2001","datePublished":"2001-10-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-07T10:48:34+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001"},"wordCount":2089,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001","name":"Bhupinder Kumar Sharma vs Bar Association Pathankot on 31 October, 2001 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2001-10-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2016-01-07T10:48:34+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/bhupinder-kumar-sharma-vs-bar-association-pathankot-on-31-october-2001#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bhupinder Kumar Sharma vs Bar Association Pathankot on 31 October, 2001"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/228242","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=228242"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/228242\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=228242"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=228242"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=228242"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}