The Madhya Pradesh High Court has quashed criminal proceedings initiated against a practicing advocate accused of committing fraud on the court by appearing as counsel for his son, who was a co-accused in a criminal matter.
A division bench of Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf held that no offence of cheating was made out against advocate Suresh Prasad Khare.
Background of the Case
The case arose from an FIR registered in 2017 at Jatara Police Station in Tikamgarh district under Section 420 IPC. Initially, the complaint was lodged against Rupesh Khare, the son of the petitioner. Later, Suresh Prasad Khare, who is also a lawyer, was added as a co-accused.
During proceedings seeking quashing of the FIR, the petitioner appeared as counsel for his son before the High Court. A Single Judge bench later observed that the advocate had not disclosed that his own quashing petition had earlier been dismissed and directed initiation of proceedings under Section 340 CrPC.
Subsequently, a complaint under Section 417 IPC was filed against him, alleging that he had committed fraud upon the court.
The division bench examined whether the advocate’s conduct amounted to cheating or fraud.
The court noted that the petition filed by the son was instituted in January 2019, while the petitioner’s own quashing petition was dismissed only in March 2020. Therefore, the allegation that he had suppressed the dismissal order was “misplaced.”
The bench further observed that Rule 13 of the Bar Council of India Rules does not prohibit a co-accused from appearing as counsel in a case.
“The Rule does not prohibit any co-accused to appear in a case as counsel,” the court said while rejecting the allegation of fraud.
The judges also referred to Supreme Court rulings on fraud and Section 340 CrPC, emphasizing that intentional deception and mens rea are essential elements before criminal prosecution can be initiated.
Allowing the revision petition, the High Court set aside the magistrate’s 2025 order refusing discharge. The bench held that the complaint under Section 417 IPC itself was legally unsustainable because Section 195 CrPC does not apply to offences under Sections 417 or 420 IPC.
The court ultimately quashed all criminal proceedings pending against the advocate in RCT No. 9808/2022.
Case Details:
Case Title: Suresh Pradsad Khare v. The High Court of Madhya Pradesh
Case Number: CRR No. 5561 of 2025
Judge: Chief Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva and Justice Vinay Saraf
Decision Date: 22 May 2026
