Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, C.KUMARAPPAN, JJ.
S.Karthikeyan - Appellant
Versus
The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, Represented by its Secretary – Respondent
W.P.No.22641 of 2021
Decided on : 30-07-2024
MANDAMUS - MISUSE OF ADVOCATE PROFESSION - The court addressed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a mandamus to direct respondents to take criminal action against an individual misusing the advocate profession. The court highlighted the importance of the Advocate Emblem and the legal implications of its misuse, directing the Bar Council to verify the individual's enrollment and the police to act against any violations of the Emblem Act.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petition was filed by the 1st respondent, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, against the 5th respondent, who was allegedly misusing the advocate emblem while running a travel business, despite not being enrolled as an advocate in the State Roll.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the 5th respondent was not enrolled as an advocate in Tamil Nadu and directed the Bar Council to verify his enrollment with the Bar Council of Delhi. The court emphasized the need for police action against the misuse of the advocate emblem.
Issues: Whether the 5th respondent misused the advocate emblem and whether appropriate action should be taken against him under the Emblem Act and penal laws.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that the misuse of the advocate emblem is a serious violation of legal provisions, necessitating verification of enrollment and appropriate action by law enforcement to uphold the integrity of the legal profession.
Result: The writ petition was disposed of with directions to the Bar Council to verify the 5th respondent's enrollment and for the police to take action against any violations of the Emblem Act.
ORDER :
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J.)
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 2 to 4 to take appropriate criminal action against the 5th respondent for his illegal activities by misusing the advocate profession under penal laws based on the complaint made by the 1st respondent dated 13.07.2021.
The writ of mandamus has been instituted to direct the respondents 2 to 4 to take appropriate criminal action against the 5th respondent for his illegal activities by misusing the advocate profession under penal laws based on the complaint made by the 1st respondent dated 13.07.2021.
2. The 1st respondent/Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry would submit that the 5th respondent has not been enrolled as an Advocate in the State Roll. The 5th respondent is running Travels. The 5th respondent is misusing Advocate Emblem by affixing the same in his vehicles. A complaint has been made against the 5th respondent before the Police and no action was taken. Therefore, the present writ petition came to be instituted.
3. The 5th respondent seems to have enrolled as an Advocate before the Bar Council of Delhi. In this regard, the 1st respondent/Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry is directed to submit appropriate complaint before the Bar Council of Delhi to verity the genuinity of the enrollment made by the 5th respondent and initiate all appropriate actions, if required. As far as the complaint submitted by the petitioner is concerned, the Police shall ensure that the Advocate emblem or stickers are not used in violation of the Emblem Act and Rules. In the event of any such violations, all appropriate actions are directed to be initiated.
4. With the above directions, the Writ petition stands disposed of .
No costs.
A writ of mandamus is not maintainable when the matter has already been adjudicated by the appropriate authority.
Full disclosure of criminal involvement is essential for enrollment as an Advocate, and failure to disclose such information can lead to dismissal of the application.
The pendency of a criminal case against an applicant serves as a bar to enrollment as an advocate before the Bar Council.
The Bar Council is mandated to investigate complaints against advocates and enforce prohibitory orders to maintain the integrity of the legal profession.
The court affirmed that pending criminal cases can disqualify candidates from enrollment as advocates, emphasizing the need for integrity in the legal profession.
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 court established that the writ of mandamus cannot be used to compel law enforcement to act on pending criminal cases, and that complaints against advocates should be addressed through the Bar Co....
The Bar Council does not have jurisdiction to investigate complaints against an Advocate Commissioner; such complaints must be addressed to the court that appointed the Commissioner.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
