Hearing the plea of Chennai-based advocate Manikandan Chettiar, the first lawyer to receive a life ban at the instance of the Bar Council of India (the first after Mahatma Gandhi in 1922), Justice D. Y. Chandrachud on Friday observed, "What's the point of the allegations against judges? Impleading the judges as parties to proceedings? What interest does a judge have? You implead the...
Hearing the plea of Chennai-based advocate Manikandan Chettiar, the first lawyer to receive a life ban at the instance of the Bar Council of India (the first after Mahatma Gandhi in 1922), Justice D. Y. Chandrachud on Friday observed, "What's the point of the allegations against judges? Impleading the judges as parties to proceedings? What interest does a judge have? You implead the Advocate General? The whole world?"
The Advocate claims to be victimised for exposing corruption by the alleged unholy judges-lawyers nexus at courts in Chennai.
In a bizarre turn of events, the Advocate-on-Record as well as the lawyer who drew the appeal sought the leave of the court to disassociate from the matter, submitting that after the memo was drafted, certain changes were incorporated without their consent.
Senior Counsel Colin Gonsalves, who represented the appellant-advocate before the Supreme Court on Friday, advanced, "Something very wrong has happened here. His whole team of lawyers is very embarrassed. Some very awkward statements have been made...The petition was drafted in a sober manner, but it was subsequently changed. And now we are all trapped ...it was very nicely drafted. Our approach was to throw ourselves at the mercy of the court. But now the AOR and the advocate who drew the petition wish to withdraw from it as their reputation is at stake..."
"Yes...even the list of dates, which the judges peruse and form an opinion, is unclear...", concurred Justice Chandrachud.
The judge suggested that Gonsalves convince the appellant to withdraw the appeal and file it afresh- "he is also a member of the bar. Just have a chat with him. I think there is a lot of stuff in his heart. Take five minutes and speak to him out of the court"
On his return, Gonsalves relayed to the bench that he did not succeed in convincing Chettiar, as he expressed desire to engage another lawyer instead.
"So we will say 'admit'. But we will decline any interim relief", said Justice Chandrachud.
When Gonsalves suggested that the bench dismiss the plea with liberty to file afresh, the judge noted that in the absence of the appellant's instructions in that behalf, the court could not so direct.
Granting the appellant two weeks' time to make alternative arrangements, the bench, also comprising Justice Hemant Gupta, relieved AOR Satya Mitra and Counsel Nabeela Hasan from the case.
In his appeal, Chettiar has averred that he was suspended in 2015 by the State Bar Council without according an opportunity of being heard, and in February last year, the BCI imposed a life ban on him.
Chettiar claimed in the appeal that he had exposed the "fake motor accident claims scam" in Tamil Nadu, the probe of which was handed over to the CBI based on his petition in HC.
He further claimed to have exposed attempts to thwart the trial of 2004 Sanakararaman murder case, which allegedly antagonised powerful persons in judiciary and legal profession, leading to termination of his membership in the bar.