Niyam v2 is live — start for just ₹100 — 200 credits to try

april 2025

Delhi High Court · 2025-04-15

CHAND MEHRA vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Citation / case number
W.P.(C)-4425/2025 2025:DHC:3269
Court
Delhi High Court
Petitioner
CHAND MEHRA
Respondent
UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment pronounced on : 15.04.2025 + W.P.(C) 4425/2025 CHAND MEHRA .....Petitioner Through: Petitioner-in-person. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr. Bhagwan Swaroop Shukla, CGSC alongwith Mr. Kamaldeep, GP for UoI. Mr. Preet Pal Singh and Ms. Tanupreet Kaur, Advocates for BCI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA SACHIN DATTA, J. (ORAL) The matter is taken up today as 14.04.2025 was declared a holiday on account of birthday of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar. 1. The present petition assails the order dated 11.11.2024 passed by the Bar Council of India (hereinafter ‘the impugned order’) whereby a revision petition filed by the petitioner against an order dated 06.10.2023 passed by the Bar Council of Delhi was dismissed. 2. The impugned order came to be passed in the background of a complaint dated 19.04.2023 bearing Complaint No. 109/2023 filed by the petitioner against respondent nos. 3-5 before the Bar Council of Delhi (BCD) alleging professional misconduct on the part of the said respondents who are lawyers engaged by the petitioner’s adversary/opposite party in respect of certain legal proceedings initiated against the petitioner including proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and a civil Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 4425/2025 Page 1 of 13 By:ABHISHEK THAKUR Signing Date:04.05.2025 22:40:17 suit for recovery of monies (hereinafter ‘the legal proceedings in question’). 3. It is the contention of the petitioner, who appears in person, that the aforesaid proceedings were instituted against the petitioner on completely false and specious grounds without any due diligence being conducted by the respondent nos. 3-5. He submits that on this account, action should be ta

CHAND MEHRA vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS. · Niyam