Delhi HC: a fake certificate cannot end an advocate's enrolment unless it actually secured that enrolment

The Delhi High Court restored an advocate's name to the rolls of the Bar Council of Delhi (BCD), while censuring her for submitting a fabricated caste certificate. The Bar Council of India (BCI) had removed her under the proviso to Section 26(1) of the Advocates Act, 1961, which applies where a person "has got his name entered" on the roll by misrepresentation as to an essential fact, by fraud or by undue influence. Complaints arose in March 2026 while she was contesting the BCD elections, and the Tehsildar, Ghaziabad reported that the OBC certificate in her 2019 enrolment file had not been issued.

Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma upheld the finding that she had furnished it, rejecting her claim that it was later inserted. But the Court held that the proviso requires a nexus between the wrongful act and the enrolment. It asked whether she would have been enrolled had the certificate never been filed, and answered yes: she was admitted to the LL.B. course in the General category, held a law degree, paid the full fee, and was covered by a 2019 BCD resolution on candidates with under 45% in graduation (she had 44.5%).

A forged degree or marksheet, the Court said, would be different. The relief was confined to Section 26(1) and was not approval of her conduct. This is a Delhi High Court ruling, binding within Delhi, not a Supreme Court precedent.