If some offence is done because of wrong advice of some advocate;still, will it be punishable?India?

Question

Suppose some person G comes to know that he has broken some law and done an offense because of wrong advice of some advocate (G's legal adviser).
It was not done if that advocate would not have suggested that ; that act was legal in G's legal adviser's view & knowledge.
Will court punish only accused G but NOT that advocate in India?
Will court punish that advocate for abettment of that offense & set G free because basic fault was of that advocate?
Or court will punish both of them in India?

Answer 1

YES BOTH ARE CULPRITS. IF IT IS PROVED IN THE COURT OF LAW.

Answer 2

In our society, it has been held as absolutely critical to persue legislative programs that are in the best interest of the people as a whole.

Because of the changes in our cultures overall view in the last 50 years, many would argue this next point: Our societal approach in determining the role of both the legislative and judicial branches has resulted from our foundation on premises intertwining Judeo-Christian and Greco-Roman values. These premises form the ground work for many aspects of Western Culture, and not just the United States.

The link provided provides an article that states that trial by jury is not, or was not at the time of its writing, a very strong part of your court system. If it were, then you could haved hoped that this option, if your case come to that point in the trial, would have been your best bet for an acquittal. However, all of these would also have to have gone in your favor:

1. Would the jury have believed your claim that you had no reasonable way to understand that the steps you were taking were potentially illegal?

2. Would there be any possibility, given the caste system in your nation, that this would play a role in the jury chosen for the case? Does the caste system play a role in India's courts?

3. Is there the likelihood that most people (your peers in your society) would agree with your decision to take the advice of your advocate at face value, and to not get a second opinion, if one could easily have been accessed.

4. If you were on a jury, if you understand the concept of a jury trial, would you believe the story you are presenting, if someone else was on trial?

5. What witnesses do you have available to testify on your behalf, and how credible are they in the eyes of the community?

6. What is your personal history regarding your life under the laws of your nation? Is your record spotless, or are their some things that could be used against you regarding ethics, as your culture and legal system define ethics?

7. If the case is still in the hands of one judge, or a panel of judges, then how the case will be decided will be somewhat cut and dried, but all of these questions should play a role.

8. In our nation, we have a principle that comes from the Latin term called "stare dececis." This principle simply states that what has been established as the historical precedent in the case, especially at the higher courts, will continue to be followed. However, if I have understood what I have read in some of the documents available on line this principle does not appear to be a part of your court system. In fact, the lack of this principle seems to have caused some gaps in your justice system, and even some corruption.

In any case, if there had been a standard set as it applies to your case, that standard would have been followed. Legal advisors who are completely skilled, articulate, and able to represent you fairly should be the ones you are asking this question.

Answer 3

most likely will dismiss the wrong doing or punish advocate
depending on circumstances...
you should really give more information for a correct answer if possible

Answer 4

I m not sure but I think yes