SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1938 Supreme(Mad) 190

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
Pandrang Row, J.
In Re: Kandan Padayachi and Ors.
Versus
Decided On : 29.07.1938

The mere citing of an advocate as a witness by the police does not disqualify the advocate from representing the accused.

Headnote:

Disqualification - Advocate - The court held that the mere fact that a lawyer is cited as a witness by the prosecution does not disqualify him from appearing as counsel for the accused in a case. The citing of an advocate as a witness by the police does not operate as a disqualification.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved the disallowance of an advocate from appearing as counsel for the accused in a murder case pending enquiry before the Magistrate, based on the advocate being cited as a witness by the police in the charge-sheet.

Finding of the Court:

The court found the reason for disallowance to be unsound and set aside the order, directing the advocate to appear for the accused.

Issues: The main issue was the disqualification of the advocate based on being cited as a witness by the police.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the mere citing of an advocate as a witness by the police does not disqualify the advocate from representing the accused.

Final Decision: The order disallowing the advocate from appearing for the accused was set aside, and the advocate was directed to represent the accused.

ORDER

Pandrang Row, J.

1. Both these cases arise out of the same matter, namely, disallowance by the Second Class Magistrate of Ariyalur of Mr. T.S. Arumugam Pillai, an Advocate, from appearing as counsel for the accused in a case of murder pending enquiry before the Magistrate. The disallowance was entirely on the ground that he had been cited as a witness by the police in the charge-sheet. It would appear that there were three charge-sheets filed in this case and the Advocates name appears as a witness only in the last charge-sheet. But this is a minor matter. The reason given for the disallowance is obviously unsound. The mere fact that a lawyer is cited as a witness by the prosecution will not disqualify him from appearing as counsel for the accused in the case. No doubt it is not in accordance with professional etiquette for a lawyer who has given evidence as a witness for the prosecution to accept or to continue to hold a brief from the accused. That is not the case here. The mere citing of an advocate as a witness by the police does not operate as a disqualification. It is easy to imagine the extraordinary results which might follow otherwise. The unfortunate effect of the order of the Magistrate has been that the accused have been continuing in custody for four months and more. The order is therefore set aside and he is directed to allow the advocate to appear for the accused.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top