While remanding a matter relating to a complaint against a Chartered Accountant for violation of statutory norms, the Delhi High Court has held that there is no prohibition to entertain a complaint at the instance of the spouse, if it discloses professional misconduct.

The Petitioner challenged the Order passed by the Board of Discipline reversing a prima facie opinion of the Director (Discipline) exonerating the second Respondent of other misconduct under the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949.

The Single Bench of Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav held, “The Board should have given clear reasons as to why the opinion given by the Director is not acceptable. There is no such prohibition to entertain a complaint at the instance of spouse, if it discloses professional misconduct. The complaint must have been taken to its logical conclusion by assigning appropriate reasons which has not been done in the instant case. The only reason that the complaint relates to a family dispute cannot be countenanced, when the allegations are made against the Chartered Accountant for violation of statutory norms.”

Advocate Aayush Agarwal represented the Petitioner, while Advocate Vibhooti Malhotra represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The impugned communication was passed in purported compliance of the direction passed in a writ petition, and it contained the decision by the Board of Discipline disagreeing with the view of the Director that the Respondent was guilty of other misconduct falling within the meaning of Clauses (2) of Part IV of the First Schedule to the Chartered Accountants Act read with section 22 of the said Act.

Reasoning

The Bench found that the prima facie opinion of the Director unequivocally recorded certain inconsistencies and deviations on the part of the private respondent. The Bench noticed that the private respondent was unable to refute the detailed findings made out in the prima facie opinion of the Director, including that the private respondent accessed the personal information of the petitioner without his consent.

The Bench further took note of the fact that no reason was assigned in the impugned order/communication. It only stated that the complaint related to a family dispute.

Thus, holding that the complaint at the instance of the spouse must have been taken to its logical conclusion by assigning appropriate reasons, the Bench remitted the matter back to the authority for deciding afresh in accordance with law after affording an opportunity for hearing to all concerned.

Cause Title: Shekhar Sharma v. The Institute of Chartered Accountant of India (Neutral Citation: 2026:DHC:2609)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocates Aayush Agarwal, Gaurav Verma

Respondent: Advocates Vibhooti Malhotra, D.S Vohra

Click here to read/download Order


Delhi High CourtJustice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.