Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M.Subramaniam, C.Kumarappan, JJ.
(Suo Motu Taken-up WP)
Versus
Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, Represented by its Secretary and anr. - Respondents
W.P.No.5785 of 2020
Decided On : 25-06-2024
MANDAMUS - DISCIPLINARY ACTION - The court addressed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a directive for disciplinary and criminal proceedings against certain respondents. The court emphasized the necessity for appropriate actions based on the status report provided by law enforcement, highlighting the role of the Bar Council in overseeing legal conduct and ensuring accountability. The decision underscored the importance of due process in addressing complaints against legal practitioners.
Fact of the Case:
A suo motu writ petition was filed based on a complaint received by the High Court regarding an incident that occurred on 18.10.2019, seeking disciplinary and criminal action against certain respondents.
Finding of the Court:
The court noted that the 6th respondent was not involved in any criminal cases and was leading a peaceful life. A status report indicated no further criminal cases against the respondents, prompting the court to direct the Bar Council to review the situation and take necessary actions.
Issues: Whether the respondents should face disciplinary and criminal proceedings based on the incident reported and the status of their conduct.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that the Bar Council has the authority to investigate and take action regarding the conduct of legal practitioners, emphasizing the need for a thorough inquiry into the complaints raised.
Result: The suo motu writ petition was disposed of with directions for the Bar Council to investigate and take appropriate actions, ensuring due process for both the complainant and the respondents.
ORDER :
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 1 to 4 to enquire and take appropriate disciplinary and criminal proceedings against the respondents 5 to 7 on the incident occurred on 18.10.2019 and submit a report before this Court.
The suo motu writ petition has been instituted based on the complaint sent to the High Court through post. The relief formulated in the suo motu writ petition is to direct the respondents 1 to 4 to take appropriate disciplinary and criminal proceedings against the respondents 5 to 7 on the incident occurred on 18.10.2019 and submit a Report before the High Court.
2. Mr.K.Balaji, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the 6th respondent would submit that now the 6th respondent has not involved in any criminal cases and leading a peaceful life. He is practicing Lawyer by maintaining good conduct and in the manner known to law. Therefore, no further actions need not be initiated.
3. Mr.S.Vinothkumar, learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing on behalf of the respondents 2 to 5 would submit that a status report has been filed by the Inspector of Police, K3-Aminjikarai Police Station, Chennai regarding the antecedents of the respondents 6, 7 & 8. It is submitted that no further criminal case has been registered against the respondents 6 to 8.
4. With reference to the criminal cases, which all are pending, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry is directed to look into the status report and other materials available on record, if any, and initiate all appropriate actions in the manner known to law. The complainant at whose instance the suo motu writ proceedings has been instituted also is to be summoned and an enquiry is to be conducted. At the outset, opportunity is to be granted to the complainant as well as the respondents 6 to 8 for initiation of further action, if any required.
5. With these clarifications, the suo motu writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.
The court affirmed the Bar Council's role in overseeing legal practitioners' conduct and the necessity of conducting inquiries into complaints to uphold legal standards.
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....
A writ of mandamus is not maintainable when the matter has already been adjudicated by the appropriate authority.
The court emphasized the importance of following proper procedures in disciplinary actions and criminal prosecutions based on reports and recommendations.
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
