ARUN MISHRA, VINEET SARAN
R. Muthukrishnan – Appellant
Versus
Registrar General of the High Court of Judicature at Madras – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
ARUN MISHRA, J.
1. The petitioner, who is an Advocate, has filed the petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, questioning the vires of amended Rules 14-A, 14-B, 14-C and 14-D of the Rules of High Court of Madras, 1970 made by the High Court of Madras under section 34(1) of the Advocates' Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘the Advocates’ Act’).
2. The High Court has inserted Rule 14A in the Rules of High Court of Madras, 1970 empowering the High Court to debar an Advocate from practicing. The High Court has been empowered to take action under Rule 14-B where any misconduct referred to under Rule 14-A is committed by an Advocate before the High Court then the High Court can debar him from appearing before the High Court and all subordinate courts. Under Rule 14-B(v) the Principal District Judge has been empowered to initiate action against the Advocate concerned and debar him from appearing before any court within such District. In case misconduct is committed before any subordinate court, the concerned court shall submit a report to the Principal District Judge and in that case, the Principal District Judge shall have the power to take appropriate action.
Supreme Court Bar Association v. Union of India
R.K. Anand v. Registrar, Delhi High Court
Pravin C. Shah v. K A. Mohd. Ali
Ex-Capt. Harish Uppal v. Union of India
Bar Council of India v. High Court of Kerala
Mohit Chaudhary, Advocate, In re
Mahipal Singh Rana v. State of U.P.
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.