The court allowed an application by an advocate to expunge adverse remarks made against him in a previous order, deeming the observation of misleading the court unwarranted for expungement purposes.
The adverse remark against the applicant in the order dated 22.11.2021 was deleted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
| SL. No. |
Date | Office Notes, reports, orders or proceedings or directions and Registrar’s order with Signatures |
COURT’S OR JUDGE’S ORDERS |
|---|---|---|---|
| WPMS No. 1736 of 2021 With WPMS No. 1754 of 2019 Shri Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, ACJ. Mr. Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel for the applicant. Mr. J.C. Pande, learned Standing Counsel for the State. Mr. Lokendra Dobhal, learned counsel for the private respondents. This application is filed to expunge the remarks made by this Court against applicant - Mr. Ashutosh Thakral, Advocate in the order dated 22.11.2021 passed by this Court. It is said that adverse observation has been made by this Court to the effect that the said advocate made a deliberate attempt to mislead the Court. Against that order, the said advocate preferred an SLP before the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has passed the following order:- “Permission to file special leave petition is dismissed. This petition is filed feeling aggrieved by certain remarks made against the petitioner in the course of the proceedings before the High Court. We think that the 1 SLP (C) Diary No. 1730/2022 petitioner should approach the same Court seeking relief which is sought before this Court. Without prejudice to the said right, the special leave petition is disposed of. Pending applications stand disposed of. We record the submission of Shri Gaurav Jain, learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos. 3 and 6, that the said |
| respondents do not have any objection to the expunging of the observations made against the petitioner and also any direction relating to the petitioner to approach the High Court in the same regard.” It is submitted by Mr. Pankaj Miglani, learned counsel appearing for Mr. Ashutosh Thakral, Advocate that the applicant is a young and budding advocate and such observation made by this Court in the initial stage of his career must adversely affect his career. It is also submitted that the said advocate did not make any deliberate attempt to mislead the Court and he is also apologizing in the Court. Mr. Lokendra Dobhal appearing for the private respondents has no objection. In that view of the matter, the application is allowed. The adverse remark- “Mr. Ashutosh Thakral, the learned counsel for the petitioner in WPMS No. 1736 of 2021 and WPMS No. 1754 of 2019 has made deliberate attempt of misleading the Court” made by this Court vide order dated 22.11.2021 is hereby deleted from the order. |
|---|
| (S.K. Mishra, ACJ.) 20.05.2022 A/- |
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the application seeking expungement of adverse remarks made against an advocate in a previous order should be allowed.
Ashutosh Thakral
Sanjaya Kumar Mishra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
