SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- S. Saghir Ahmad, G.B. Pattanaik and M. Jagannadha Rao, JJ.

Crl. M. P. Nos. 4620-21 of 1997 in Crl. Appeal No. 312 of 1988. D/d. 24.2.1998.

K.I. Pavunny - Petitioner

Versus

Asstt. Collector, Cochin - Respondent

Constitution of India, Article 134 - Expunction of remarks - Applicant after retirement as Judge from Allahabad High Court practising as senior advocate - Remarks passed in judgment by Supreme Court against his competence as counsel - No opportunity to explain his handicapped given - Remarks ordered to be treated as deleted.

[Paras 2 and 3]

ORDER

The applicant was a practising Advocate at Allahabad mainly on the taxation side and was elevated as Judge of the Allahabad High Court. He retired in July, 1992 and has since been enrolled as Senior Advocate in this Court.

2. While deciding Criminal Appeal No. 548 of 1988 some remarks came to be made against his competence as counsel. These applications have been given by him that those remarks may be deleted as he was not given an opportunity to explain his conduct before those remarks were made. It is pointed out by him in his applications as under :

"That as already stated that since the brief of the applicant consisted only of a copy of the High Court Judgment and no other papers were there and judgment was reserved and the remarks against the applicant were ultimately made in the judgment dated 3rd February, 1997. The applicant did not get any opportunity to place the handicapped while arguing the case.

3. Having heard the learned counsel who is appearing in person and having perused the judgment, we allow the applications. Remarks made against the applicant personally in the judgment delivered by this Court on February 3, 1997 shall be treated to have been deleted.

Order accordingly.