NARENDRA SINGH AND SHAMBHU SINGHJI Vs. S S DEEDWANIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE three Criminal (Misc.) Petitions (Nos. 13, 14 and 15 of 1954) have been argued together. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has presented these applications under Article 134 of the Constitution. It is, however, conceded that proceedings under the Legal Practitioners Act are only quasi criminal in character. I am of the view that Article 134 applies only to criminal proceedings and not to proceedings under the Legal Practitioners Act which are more administrative in character and concern merely the maintenance of the dis cipline among the officers of the Court. I am in clined to the view that Article 134 does not refer to such proceedings.

(2.) THE learned Counsel has suggested that al proceedings must fall either within the purview of Article 133 or Article 134. I am unable to agree. THEn are many proceedings like the proceedings before the Election Tribunals which are not within the purview of either Article 133 or 134. In such cases, the remedy lies in applying direct for special leave under Article 136, and the petitioner does not suffer any disadvantage merely because the proceedings are not covered by the provisions of Article 133 and 134 of the Constitution.