“Practicing Law Should Refrain from Taking Up Cases of Kin”: Allahabad High Court Dismisses Attorney Representing Father in Divorce

In a recent hearing on a criminal contempt case brought by a Family Court, the Allahabad High Court (HC) noted that although attorneys are free to choose their clients, they should refrain from defending close family members in order to avoid emotional entanglement.

A son-attorney and his father-litigant were sent with contempt letters in this case for interfering with the Family Court of Aligarh.

The son’s representation of his father in a marital matter involving the lawyer’s mother was criticized by the High Court bench made up of Justices Saumitra Dayal Singh and Rajendra Kumar, who described the scenario as “catastrophic.” It was emphasized that attorneys need to know instinctively not to represent their own family members.

“Courtes cannot give attorneys advice on who to represent. It has always been up to the discernment of the erudite bar members. The division bench said that any member of the bar should not appear in court for his blood relations as part of their basic training during their early years of practice.

The lawyer became involved in the dispute itself, according to the court, since he not only pursued his father’s case but also pursued it against his mother.

Despite the apparent lack of sincerity in the contemnors’ apologies, the HC opted to swiftly end the contempt proceedings in order to save the time of legitimate plaintiffs. Furthermore, we want to be clear that neither Subhash Kumar nor Shubham Kumar have been exonerated of responsibility for their actions; rather, we have declined to utilize our authority. The only reason we decline to give them any more airtime is because we want to avoid wasting time. They are utterly unworthy of it. Thus condemned,” the bench declared.

THE MATTER

The case started with a written complaint to file charges of contempt against Subhash Kumar and Shubham Kumar, his son who practiced law. It was stated that Subhash had misbehaved with the Family Court No. 1 judge during the hearing of a separate case. Subhash was warned not to disturb the court, but he persisted, and contempt proceedings ensued. Shubham threatened to file a complaint against the Presiding Officer, further interfering with the court procedures. In addition, he had yelled that he was an Allahabad High Court practitioner and that he was experienced in handling lower courts.

The contemnors argued in the high court proceedings that they had the highest regard for the establishment and had not intentionally done any acts of contempt. The judge’s documented order sheet and Shubham’s conduct, however, provided the court with proof to the contrary.

The HC underlined the importance of respectful judicial procedures free from unnecessary interruptions and that complaints should be handled in the proper manner and at the appropriate time.

The High Court also recognized the Family Court judge’s impeccable record, noting that she had done everything possible to uphold decorum in court. The judge also directed that a copy of the order be sent to the Uttar Pradesh Bar Council so that it could be properly reviewed and Shubham Kumar could receive the necessary counseling.