Indian-Origin Barrister Anurag Mohindru Disbarred Over Oxford Medical Degree Fabrication
A prominent Indian-origin barrister who held one of the highest positions in the UK legal profession has been stripped of his right to practice law after being found guilty of fabricating his academic credentials. Anurag Mohindru, 50, a King’s Counsel who defended high-profile clients including England cricketer Ben Stokes, was disbarred by an independent disciplinary tribunal for lying about studying medicine at Oxford University.
The case has sent shockwaves through the legal community, highlighting the paramount importance of integrity in a profession built on trust and honesty. For someone who had achieved the prestigious title of King’s Counsel—often referred to as “taking silk”—the fall from grace has been swift and decisive.
The Fabricated Claims That Led to Downfall
The charges against Mohindru stem from a job application he made in November 2012 to 23 Essex Street chambers, one of London’s most prestigious barristers’ chambers specializing in criminal law, fraud, and regulatory matters. During his application for tenancy at the chambers, Mohindru submitted a curriculum vitae containing a critical falsehood that would eventually destroy his career.
In his CV, Mohindru asserted that he had studied biomedical science and medicine at Oxford University from 1993 to 1994, when in fact he had never attended the institution. The Bar Standards Board (BSB), the regulatory body overseeing barristers in England and Wales, stated that inquiries made by Oxford University found absolutely no record of Mohindru as a student at any time.
The BSB charged Mohindru with “deliberately exaggerating his academic achievements and qualifications in an attempt to improve his tenancy prospects”. What made the deception particularly egregious was that he had doubled down on these claims by providing additional documentation to support his false assertions about his medical studies.
The Disciplinary Process and Verdict
The case was heard by a five-person disciplinary tribunal organized by the Bar Tribunals and Adjudication Service (BTAS), an independent body that handles the most serious cases of professional misconduct among barristers. The tribunal, which commenced on September 8 and concluded on September 12, 2025, consisted of a judge as chair, two barristers, and two non-legal professionals from the public.
Mohindru faced two charges of professional misconduct. The first charge, which led to his disbarment, related to providing false information about his educational background. A second charge alleging that he had falsely claimed to be a qualified medical doctor was dismissed by the tribunal.
Despite Mohindru’s denial that he had “knowingly” provided false information, the tribunal found that his behavior constituted a serious breach of the standards expected of members of the Bar. Nicholas Ainsley, who chaired the disciplinary panel, noted that Mohindru had enjoyed a “brilliantly successful” career before this misconduct came to light.
The tribunal’s finding of dishonesty left them with little choice but to impose the ultimate sanction. Having concluded that Mohindru had acted dishonestly, the panel decided that disbarment was the appropriate punishment. He was immediately suspended pending any appeal and ordered to pay substantial legal costs of £54,780 to the BSB.
The Significance of King’s Counsel Status
What makes Mohindru’s fall from grace particularly striking is that he held the title of King’s Counsel (KC), formerly known as Queen’s Counsel during the reign of Queen Elizabeth II. This prestigious designation represents the pinnacle of the barrister profession and is awarded only to those who have demonstrated exceptional skill and expertise in advocacy.
KCs are often called “silks” because they wear silk gowns to signify their elevated status, and achieving this rank is known as “taking silk”. The appointment requires at least 10-15 years of legal experience and recognition by the monarch on the recommendation of the Lord Chancellor. Only the most accomplished advocates receive this honor, making Mohindru’s misconduct all the more damaging to the profession’s reputation.
Mohindru was called to the Bar of England and Wales by London’s Middle Temple Inn in 2004 and had built a successful career representing high-profile clients. Most notably, he defended England cricket star Ben Stokes during his 2018 trial for affray following a nightclub incident, securing an acquittal for the all-rounder. He also appeared in significant cases involving people smuggling and other serious criminal matters.
Professional and Personal Consequences
The repercussions of the tribunal’s decision extended beyond Mohindru’s legal career. Within days of the ruling, he was forced to step down as chairman of Essex County Cricket Club, a position he had held since 2023. The cricket club confirmed his resignation in a statement, with Jason Gallian appointed as interim chair and Vicky Ford as interim deputy chair.
Essex County Cricket Club thanked Mohindru for his “leadership and significant contribution” during his tenure, but the circumstances of his departure cast a shadow over his previous achievements. The club’s swift action in accepting his resignation demonstrates how seriously such misconduct allegations are taken across different sectors.
The Bar Standards Board’s Response
The BSB’s spokesperson emphasized the gravity of Mohindru’s actions, stating that “the public and profession should expect barristers to be honest when applying for positions within chambers”. The spokesperson continued: “Dishonesty such as this undermines the trust and confidence that the public places in barristers and in the profession as a whole. The tribunal’s decision to disbar Mr Mohindru reflects the seriousness of this misconduct and the importance of maintaining the integrity of the Bar”.
This case serves as a stark reminder of the regulatory framework governing the legal profession. The BSB operates a rigorous four-stage enforcement process: initial assessment, investigation, decision-making, and disciplinary action. For the most serious cases, like Mohindru’s, matters are referred to independent disciplinary tribunals that have the power to impose sanctions ranging from warnings and fines to suspension and ultimate disbarment.
A Cautionary Tale for the Legal Profession
Mark Harries KC, representing Mohindru during the disciplinary proceedings, described his client’s actions as a “gross error of judgement which had come back to haunt him”. This characterization underscores how a single act of dishonesty, committed over a decade ago, can ultimately destroy an otherwise successful legal career.
The case highlights the legal profession’s unwavering commitment to integrity and honesty. Unlike other professions where misconduct might result in warnings or temporary suspensions, the legal system takes a zero-tolerance approach to dishonesty, particularly when it involves senior practitioners who serve as role models for junior colleagues.
Implications for Professional Standards
Mohindru’s disbarment sends a clear message throughout the legal profession about the consequences of dishonesty. The fact that someone who had achieved the highest ranks of the profession could lose everything over false claims about his educational background serves as a powerful deterrent to others who might be tempted to embellish their qualifications.
The case also demonstrates the thoroughness of background checks and the long memory of professional misconduct. Despite the false claims being made in 2012, the truth eventually emerged, showing that dishonesty in professional applications can have lasting consequences that may surface years later.
The Price of Deception
Anurag Mohindru’s story is ultimately a cautionary tale about the devastating consequences of professional dishonesty. From the heights of King’s Counsel to complete disbarment, his journey illustrates how quickly a successful career can unravel when built on false foundations. The legal profession’s uncompromising stance on integrity ensures that trust—the cornerstone of the justice system—is rigorously protected, regardless of an individual’s achievements or status.
As the legal community processes this high-profile case, it serves as a sobering reminder that excellence in advocacy and professional success mean nothing if they are not underpinned by fundamental honesty and integrity.
Click Here to subscribe to our newsletters and get the latest updates directly to your inbox.