A recent court hearing in the capital took an unexpected turn as a lawyer’s conduct during the proceedings was deemed inappropriate and subsequently referred to the Delhi High Court and the Bar Council of Delhi for further assessment. The incident occurred during a session presided over by Additional Sessions Judge Pulastya Pramachala, where advocate Anil Kumar Goswami was acting as a proxy counsel for two accused individuals.
During the proceedings on April 7, Goswami faced criticism for his reluctance to cross-examine a police witness, citing the absence of the primary advocate due to an emergency. However, when questioned by ASJ Pramachala regarding his repeated appearances for the accused, Pankaj Shukla and Rohit Shukla, Goswami claimed he was merely a proxy, despite evidence suggesting he had signed the vakalatnama, authorizing him to legally represent the accused.
The situation escalated when Goswami retorted to the judge’s inquiry with remarks such as, “are you settling a score?” and “How do I know what you and your stenographer have recorded or written?” These comments prompted the judge to describe Goswami’s behavior as “shocking” and indicative of ulterior motives rather than professional advocacy.
Judge Pramachala expressed his concern in the order, stating, “I have no second thought that such conduct on the part of an advocate cannot be termed as professional on the parameters of rules framed by the bar council.” He further noted that Goswami had previously been recognized as an authorized counsel on record, yet chose to challenge the court’s records publicly, complicating the legal proceedings.
