Bombay High Court: In a case where the Court came across highly objectionable photographs annexed by the counsel for the petitioner, a Division Bench of Revati Mohite Dere and S.M. Modak, JJ., directed the Advocate, to deposit costs of Rs. 25,000/- with the Kirtikar Law Library, within two weeks from the date of the order.
The Court remarked that “No sense of proportion or discretion is exercised by the Counsel whilst annexing the said photographs.”
The Court noted that the advocates fail to realize that these petitions are filed/placed before the Registry and get circulated through various departments, exposing the parties involved in the photographs and it is expected that all lawyers/Advocates must exercise some discretion and proportion whilst annexing the photographs which are highly objectionable.
The Court directed the counsel for petitioner to remove the said photographs which are annexed as well as from the copies served on the Counsel for the respondents and Assistant Public Prosecutor forthwith.
[Jyotsna D Souza v. State of Maharashtra, 2022 SCC OnLine Bom 3481, decided on 07-10-2022]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Mr. Anand Pandey i/b Mr. Ramesh Tripathi, Advocate, for the Petitioner;
Mr. J.P. Yagnik, A.P.P, Advocate, for the Respondent-State;
Mr. Waqar Pathan, Advocate, for the Respondent 3.
*Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has put this report together.