IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S. VAIDYANATHAN, A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA, JJ.
D. Shanthi & Another - Appellant
Versus
The State Rep By Its, The Commissioner of Police, Chennai & Others - Respondent
H.C.P.No. 728 of 2022
Decided On : 18-08-2022
WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS PETITION - Bar Council Member Resignation - The court clarified the power of the Bar Council to remove an advocate from a post and emphasized that an advocate facing criminal charges shall not hold any post in the Statutory Committees until exoneration by the Appropriate Forum.
Fact of the Case:
The court was informed about the collection and handover of keys to the petitioner, the filing of an application for police custody of the 4th respondent, and the likely discharge of the 3rd respondent from the hospital. The Bar Council member's resignation and the issue of false charges against advocates were also discussed.
Finding of the Court:
The court clarified the power of the Bar Council to remove an advocate from a post and emphasized that an advocate facing criminal charges shall not hold any post in the Statutory Committees until exoneration by the Appropriate Forum.
Issues: The issues included the collection and handover of keys, the filing of an application for police custody, the likely discharge of the 3rd respondent, the Bar Council member's resignation, and the issue of false charges against advocates.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that an advocate facing criminal charges shall not hold any post in the Statutory Committees until exoneration by the Appropriate Forum.
Final Decision: The matter was listed for the next hearing, and the petitioner and the detenue were not required to be present unless specifically ordered by the Court.
JUDGMENT
(Prayer - To issue a WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS PETITION to direct the 2nd respondent to produce my adopted son namely A.P.DHEERAJ MAAL, 17 AGE S/O.LATE PANDURANGAN who is illegally detained in the hands of the respondents 3 and 4, before this Honble Court and hand over the petitioner and set him at Liberty.)
S. Vaidyanathan, J. & A.D. Jagadish Chandira, J.
When the matter is taken up for hearing, it is represented by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor that pursuant to the orders of this Court dated 16.08.2022, keys have been collected by the Investigation Officer. Keys are now being handed over to the petitioner through counsel for the petitioner today. It is further represented that the Investigation Officer has filed an application before the concerned Magistrate for taking Police custody of the 4th Respondent. It is also represented that Ramya / 3rd respondent and others, who have consumed poison, are likely to be discharged from the Rajiv Gandhi Government Hospital, Chennai in a day or two.
2. At this juncture, Mr.S.Prabakar, Chairman of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry has submitted with reference to Paragraph No.4 of the previous order dated 16.08.2022 that C.Sri Muruga, who is a Bar Council member and whose name is referred to in the order dated 11.01.2022 in Crl.O.P.No.390 of 2022, has already forwarded his resignation letter dated 15.08.2022 to the Bar Council, relieving himself from the post of Member of the Enrollment Committee and that they are yet to receive the resignation letter from T.Michael Stains Prabhu, who is said to be in Tuticorin. He has pointed out that Bar Council has no power to remove an Advocate from the post which he/she is holding in the Bar Council.
3. We make it clear that in case T.Michael Stains Prabhu is not going to submit his resignation, he is deemed to have divested from the post of Member of the Enrollment Committee, Disciplinary Committee and he shall not hold any post in any of the Statutory Committees, including Enrollment Committee in future till his exoneration by the Appropriate Forum. It is a shame for a Graduate in Law to get the Enrollment Certificate signed by an accused in a criminal case.
4. Mr.S.Prabakar has submitted that the Bar Council will weed out unscrupulous elements. However, he has further submitted that of late, false charges are being levelled and framed against Advocates and therefore, a clarification is sought in respect of first three lines of Paragraph No.5 of the order dated 16.08.2022, wherein it has been observed as follows:
“5.It is needless to mention that in case of any Advocate, who is a member of the Bar Council, facing a criminal case, he shall not hold such post till he is exonerated from the charges completely by the Appropriate Forum...”
5. The first three lines alone should not be read in isolation, as a conjoint reading of the entire paragraph would mean to indicate that in case an Advocate, who is a member of the Bar Council, has been facing criminal charges, he / she shall not hold any of the post in the Statutory Committees, which include Enrollment Committee and Disciplinary Committee.
6. Mr.C.K.Chandrasekar, learned Counsel for Bar Council shall inform this Court about the compliance of the order dated 28.01.2022 made in Crl.O.P.No.390 of 2022 that is extracted below:
“4....In the event of registration of F.I.R. against the advocates, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry to be informed of the same. The Bar Council to take necessary disciplinary proceedings. It is the duty of public, police and Bar Council to weed out undesirable elements from the profession, who bring disrespect to the profession, follow unethical practices in some cases they themselves turn into offenders. In this case the allegation points towards several advocates who are all related, inter linked, which cannot be lost sight of.”
7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor has stated that notice has already been served on Ra
AI
An advocate facing criminal charges shall not hold any post in the Statutory Committees until exoneration by the Appropriate Forum.
The court emphasized the importance of investigating forged documents, removing a member facing criminal charges from a responsible post in the Bar Council, verifying documents registered by the indi....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the court's authority to direct the engagement of a lawyer for a respondent and request the Bar Council to furnish all papers to the assisting advo....
Section 38 of the Advocates' Act, 1961 establishes a mandatory appellate process to the Supreme Court for aggrieved parties in Bar Council proceedings, which must be adhered to instead of seeking wri....
The court mandated strict scrutiny of advocate enrollment applications, particularly for those with pending criminal cases or bogus qualifications, emphasizing the need for integrity in the legal pro....
The pendency of a criminal case against an applicant serves as a bar to enrollment as an advocate before the Bar Council.
The eligibility for enrollment as an advocate under the Advocates Act is contingent upon compliance with specific disqualifications, particularly concerning concurrent employment in government servic....
The Bar Council of India has the authority to adjudicate disputes regarding the enrolment of advocates, and the court will not intervene in disputed factual matters pending before it.
The High Court may direct a statutory body like the Bar Council to expeditiously process representations regarding professional qualification disputes once internal procedural prerequisites, such as ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.