Bar Councils must collect data on lawyers facing criminal records, says Madras High Court
It is high time for the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry (BCTNP) to engage the services
It is high time for the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry (BCTNP) to engage the services of competent researchers for collecting empirical data regarding the number of advocates facing criminal cases, the Madras High Court has said. Justice D. Bharata Chakravarty, holding the criminal cases quash portfolio, made the observation after coming across 30 to 40 criminal cases involving practicing advocates on almost every working day. The judge expressed concern over the alarming number of such cases faced by lawyers. He told Government Advocate (criminal side) M. Mohamed Riyaz that a considerable number of petitions were being filed in the High Court on a daily basis either by the practicing advocates or by the law graduates to quash the criminal cases pending against them.
Later, passing a detailed order on the issue, the judge wrote: “This court has noticed an increasing trend of such cases... It is further noticed that in several instances certain advocates accused of indulging in criminal activities eventually become office bearers/leaders of various Bar Associations.” He went on to state: “When persons facing multiple criminal prosecution become members of the Bar, and thereafter aspire to occupy leadership positions in Bar Associations, the issue assumes a different dimension. Advocates are officers of the court and constitute an integral part of the justice delivery system. If persons facing criminal allegations become office bearers of Bar Associations and their number increases manifold in every Bar, a legitimate concern arises as to whether they would be in a position to effectively safeguard the interests of the clients whom they represent and uphold the dignity and values expected of the legal profession.” Making it clear that the court was not concerned with isolated instances involving one or two advocates, Justice Chakravarty said if a substantial/large section of lawyers were involved in criminal cases, it had the potential of not only affecting the image of the bar in the long run but also the credibility of the justice delivery system itself.
He stated the issue had reached a stage where an appropriate policy decision may be required at the level of the BCI and the BCTNP which were the statutory authorities entrusted with the responsibility of regulating the legal profession. “It is made clear that these observations are not intended to cast an aspersion upon any individual advocate. The concern expressed by this court is purely institutional. A comprehensive and objective study of the prevailing situation has become imperative,” the judge observed. Since collection of empirical data was the first step towards framing appropriate rules or guidelines, the judge suo motu impleaded the BCI and BCTNP as parties to one of the cases pending before him and sought their views on conducting a survey. He granted time till August 24, 2026 for the BCI and BCTNP to make their submissions before the court.
The BriefWire