The Madras High Court today directed the Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu, to take disciplinary action against two lawyers for violation of 49[1][c] of Advocates Act and Rule of Bar Council for making allegations against Public Prosecutor S Shanmuga Velayutham.
The advocates Manikandan Vathan Chettiar and Mathan Kumar made some allegations against Velayutham while appearing for one Nachimuthu in a criminal case filed against him.
Justice P N Prakash, apart from directing the Bar Council to take action against the advocates, also directed Nachimuthu, who made complaints against Velayutham in connection with the case, to pay Rs 10,000 to Tamil Nadu Legal Services Authority.
Also Read
The case relates to a criminal investigation by police at Tiruppur where Nachimuthu made allegations against Velayutham stating he was preventing production of case diary before the Court.
Justice Prakash, who took a serious view of the allegations made against the Public Prosecutor, in his order said "the Bar Council of India has framed rules setting the standard of professional conduct and etiquette to be observed by the advocates."
"Bar Council Rule No.4 states that an advocate shall use his best efforts to restrain and prevent his client from resorting to sharp or unfair practises of doing anything in relation to the court, opposing counsel or parties which the advocate himself ought not to do", the judge said.
"An advocate shall refuse to represent the client who persists in such improper conduct. He shall not consider himself a mere mouth-piece of the client and shall exercise his own judgement in the use of restrained language in correspondence, avoiding scurrilous attacks in pleadings and using intemperate language during arguments in court", the judge said.
"This is not merely an isolated incident of such uncharitable allegations being made against S Shanmuga Velayutham. Manikandan Vathan Chettiar's office has been consistently making such allegations."
"Shanmuga Velayutham is the Public Prosecutor appointed by the state government for this High Court. Therefore, he holds a very responsible position in the state apparatus. This Court cannot be a silent spectator to such insinuations", the judge said.
