Madhya Pradesh High Court: In an application filed under Section 430(1) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), seeking bail and suspension of the remaining sentence, a Division Bench of Vivek Rusia and Gajendra Singh, JJ., dismissed the application and held that “advocates are not supposed to give affidavit in support of the facts stated in the application.”
The application for suspension of sentence was supported by an affidavit not of the appellant himself but of his counsel. The affidavit contained factual claims, including that the appellant was falsely implicated and had not committed any offence.
The Court scrutinised the propriety and legal validity of such affidavits submitted by lawyers on behalf of their clients and categorically held that advocates are not supposed to give affidavits in support of the facts stated in the application. The Court reasoned that lawyers are not witnesses to the incident and therefore cannot vouch for the truth of factual allegations made by the client. The Court specifically stated that
“In the present application, it has been pleaded that the appellant has been falsely implicated and he has not committed any crime. These facts cannot be verified by an Advocate as he was not present at the time of incident.”
The Court condemned the practice and unequivocally stated that “this practice of filing affidavit by the Advocates is deprecated.” The Court dismissed the application on the ground that it was supported by an affidavit filed by the counsel instead of the appellant.
The Court issued direction to the Bar Association to circulate general guidelines cautioning advocates not to file affidavits on behalf of their clients in matters where the factual basis of the case is involved. The Court further directed the office not to accept such applications in the future where affidavits are signed by advocates instead of the concerned parties.
[Lavkesh v. State of M.P., CRA No. 1150 of 2015, Decided on 14-05-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
Shri Chandra Prakash Purohit, Counsel for the Appellant
Shri Sudeep Bhargava, Dy. Advocate General, Counsel for the Respondent/State
