Breaking SUPREME COURT REAFFIRMS PUBLIC DOMAIN PROTECTION FOR DIGITAL LAWS
New Delhi · Tuesday, 22 September 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law - free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2017-04-06 allowed

Ajitsinh Arjunsinh Gohil vs Bar Council of Gujarat and Anr

Bench: 2 — Dipak Misra

In Brief

A disciplinary case against an advocate remained pending before a State Bar Council's disciplinary committee beyond the statutory one-year period and was automatically transferred to the Bar Council of India (BCI) under Section 36B(1) of the Advocates Act, 1961. Instead of deciding the case, the BCI remanded it back to the State Bar Council with a deadline for decision. The Supreme Court held that once proceedings are transferred by operation of law to the BCI due to delay by the State Bar Council, the BCI acquires original jurisdiction and must decide the matter finally on merits. Remitting the case back is impermissible as it defeats the statutory scheme ensuring timely adjudication. The Court distinguished this from appellate jurisdiction, where remand is permissible. The appeal was allowed and the matter was remanded to the BCI to decide within three months.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Legal Professional Conduct Disciplinary Proceedings Advocates Act Bar Council Administrative Law Statutory Interpretation

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login