"Fake Lawyer" Scam: SC Grants Bail to Woman Accused of Impersonating Supreme Court Advocate

Supreme Court Judgement

"Fake Lawyer" Scam: SC Grants Bail to Woman Accused of Impersonating Supreme Court Advocate

A new petition argues that the UGC's 2026 Regulations define "caste-based discrimination" too narrowly, leaving out students from non-reserved categories who might also face bias.

Tanzeel Sarwar
2 min read

Follow Jurisight:TelegramWhatsApp

"Fake Lawyer" Scam: SC Grants Bail to Woman Accused of Impersonating Supreme Court Advocate — Supreme Court Judgement Legal Analysis | Jurisight

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday granted bail to Poonam Charandas Khanna, a 60-year-old woman accused of cheating multiple builders in Mumbai by falsely presenting herself as a practicing advocate in the Supreme Court.

The Bench, comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, set aside the Bombay High Court's order refusing her bail. The Court noted that the accused had already spent nearly two years in custody and the trial was proceeding at a snail's pace.

The case against Khanna is built on an FIR registered at Kherwadi Police Station, Mumbai, in 2020. The complainant, a builder named Ashok Govindram Mohnani, alleged that he was introduced to Khanna as a "Supreme Court lawyer" who could solve his legal troubles.

  1. Legal Fees: She allegedly demanded ₹15 lakh to handle two legal cases, receiving an advance of ₹10 lakh.
  2. The Big Con: The builders were facing issues with electricity connections for their construction sites. Khanna allegedly assured them she would file a petition to get transformers installed. For this, she demanded a whopping ₹3 crore, eventually signing an MoU for ₹2.11 crore.
  3. The Unraveling: After paying over ₹71 lakh in cash and transfers, the builders realized no petition was filed. Inquiries revealed she was not a qualified advocate at all.


Appearing for Khanna, Advocate Prastut Mahesh Dalvi argued that she is a senior citizen who has been in custody since January 2024 (and previously). He highlighted that the maximum punishment for cheating (Section 420 IPC) is 7 years, yet the trial is nowhere near completion with only 8 out of 12 witnesses examined.

The Supreme Court accepted these contentions.

"A case for grant of bail is made out, particularly in view of the prolonged incarceration and the nature of the offences."

The Court directed her release subject to trial court conditions, warning that any misuse of liberty would lead to cancellation of bail.


Tanzeel Sarwar

Cyber and AI Governance

More stories by Tanzeel