1. On the facts of the case we are not inclined to accept the recommendation made by the learned District Judge for suspension of the pleader
concerned. The facts of the case as also the decision recorded by the learned Judge make it clear that the misconduct for which the pleader was
charged rendered him liable to criminal prosecution. In consonance with the view taken by this Court in cases of this description, we hold that
where the allegation against a legal practitioner amounted to a charge of criminal prosecution, the correct procedure to be followed is that these
proceedings should not be taken but that, if it was thought necessary to take action, it should be by way of criminal prosecution. We are clearly of
opinion that the facts and circumstances of the ease as they appear from the materials placed before us, do not justify institution of criminal
proceedings against the pleader. In our judgment the proceedings initiated by the learned District Judge under the Legal Practitioners'' Act in the
case before us should not have been started at all; and in that view the Reference is rejected. It is stated to us that the pleader concerned is already
under suspension under orders of the learned District Judge. The ad-interim order of suspension made by the learned Judge is cancelled.
