The Supreme Court on Monday expressed significant concerns regarding Senior Advocate Rishi Malhotra, accusing him of making false statements in no fewer than 15 different cases. The revelations came as part of a heated discourse over an Advocate-on-Record (AoR) who blamed Malhotra for errors in an affidavit related to a remission case.
Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih of the bench noted Malhotra’s attempt to shift blame onto a junior lawyer, which they regarded as an aggravating factor. The court is now poised to implement new guidelines to ensure such lapses are avoided in the future.
“We encounter this day in, day out. We will issue guidelines. Today, you are in a position where there is clear misconduct under Rule 10, Order 4,” Justice Oka remarked during the proceedings. The court appointed Dr. S. Muralidhar, former Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court and now a Senior Advocate, as Amicus Curiae to assist in this matter, with further hearings scheduled for November 11.
This situation arose when an AoR, upon directions from Malhotra, signed an appeal that omitted crucial details — a recurring issue that the Supreme Court has begun to notice with concern. In this specific instance, the appeal failed to mention that the Supreme Court had previously reinstated a 30-year sentence without remission in a kidnapping case.
The AoR involved, Jaydip Pati, later stated in an affidavit that he had never questioned Malhotra’s integrity while signing the pleadings as requested. However, the oversight led the bench to express dismay, prompting them to consider stricter control measures over the conduct of AoRs, who play a crucial role in the judiciary.
In response to the court’s dissatisfaction, Senior Advocate Meenakshi Arora, representing Malhotra, requested permission for her client to submit a revised affidavit. The court granted this request but made clear its intentions to address broader issues of accountability among AoRs.
“Apart from the dispute between senior and junior revealed in the affidavit, the conduct of the Senior in terms of the Supreme Court rules is of concern. AoRs have been assigned a very important role, as no litigant can seek redressal without them. It is therefore necessary to frame guidelines on this aspect, for which the learned President and office bearers of the Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (SCAORA) have agreed to assist,” Justice Oka explained.
