Disciplinary findings against professionals need objective proof, and later settlement material must be independently examined before guilt is recorded.

Disciplinary proceedings against a professional, especially where the allegations have quasi-criminal overtones, must rest on objective and convincing documentary and oral material. A later settlement, memorandum of understanding, or the complainant's subsequent stand cannot be ignored if they may affect the dispute, and they require independent examination before any adverse finding is recorded. Where foundational facts such as diversion of funds or supporting bank and tax material are not objectively established, a misconduct finding cannot safely stand on an incomplete record and may require fresh inquiry on all relevant materials.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the disciplinary proceedings could be sustained in the light of the asserted settlement and later memorandum of understanding between the parties; (ii) Whether the finding of other misconduct was supported by sufficient objective material.

Issue (i): Whether the disciplinary proceedings could be sustained in the light of the asserted settlement and later memorandum of understanding between the parties.

Analysis: The complaint was not shown to have been effectively withdrawn in a manner that rendered the disciplinary matter automatically non-existent. The later memorandum of understanding and the complainant's subsequent stand were material developments that required independent examination. The record showed that these later documents were not properly investigated before the adverse finding was returned.

Conclusion: The issue was decided in favour of the respondent; the matter could not be concluded without examining the later settlement material.

Issue (ii): Whether the finding of other misconduct was supported by sufficient objective material.

Analysis: Proceedings of this nature, though disciplinary, carry quasi criminal overtones and require convincing documentary and oral material. The Court found that essential foundational facts were not objectively established, since the record did not adequately prove the alleged diversion of amounts or the supporting bank and tax material. The Council had proceeded too hastily on an incomplete evidentiary foundation.

Conclusion: The finding of misconduct could not be sustained on the existing material and was set aside for fresh inquiry.

Final Conclusion: The disciplinary finding was not finally affirmed and the matter was sent back for a fresh inquiry on all relevant materials, including the later memorandum and the complainant's evidence.

Ratio Decidendi: In disciplinary proceedings against a professional, where allegations have quasi criminal overtones, a finding of misconduct must rest on objective and convincing material, and any later settlement or related document material to the dispute must be independently examined before guilt is recorded.

---