Professional and other Misconduct

On the basis of Ext. 13, a resolution dated 21.5.92, the appellant was found guilty of Misconduct by the Bar Council Tribunal—When the resolution book of the Joypurhat Bar Association was first produced before the Tribunal on 2.12.93, it was not marked as exhibit, only the impugned resolution dated 3.5.92 was marked as Ext. 2. since it was resolution book, it was given to the Jimmy of the appellant being president of the Bar Association. Again being directed the resolution book was produced before the tribunal on 6.1 .94 and thereafter on 30.3.94 the resolution book was marked as Ext. 12. When objection was taken to the resolution dated 21.5.92. it was marked as Ext-l3—the findings of the tribunal, this resolution dated 21.5.92 is an act of forgery by substituting new pages in the resolution book seeing the writings and pages of the resolution book, since the resolution book was taken aback by the appellant and he also refilled the same before the tribunal, he is liable for this forgery—the findings of forgery is absolutely based on presumption, supposition, hypothesis and surmise and there is no evidence to
show that the resolution dated 2 1.5.92 was forged and fabricated by the appellant after he took it back from the tribunal on 2. 12.92—appeal is allowed.

S.A. AIim Vs. D. Golam Nabi & Anr. 3BLT (HCD)-1.