Skip to content


S. Manikandan Vs. The Secretary, Tamilnadu Bar Council, Chennai and Others - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
CourtChennai High Court
Decided On
Case NumberWrit Petition No. 2309 of 2016
Judge
AppellantS. Manikandan
RespondentThe Secretary, Tamilnadu Bar Council, Chennai and Others
Excerpt:
.....as advocate in the roll of the bar council of tamilnadu) order: huluvadi g. ramesh, j. 1. this writ petition is filed praying to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to enroll the petitioner as advocate in the roll of the bar council of tamilnadu 2. heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties. 3. it appears that the petitioner made an application for enrolment as an advocate along with necessary documents on 30.03.2015. it appears that the police having apprehended a student, was taken to the police station, where petitioner shown to have went there to rescue the student to get him released, for which, the police were not agreeable. in this regard, a commotion took place. for having went there to the police station with a group of people, fir has been.....
Judgment:

(Prayer:Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to enroll the petitioner as Advocate in the roll of the Bar Council of Tamilnadu)

Order:

Huluvadi G. Ramesh, J.

1. This writ petition is filed praying to issue a writ of mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to enroll the petitioner as Advocate in the roll of the Bar Council of Tamilnadu

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3. It appears that the petitioner made an application for enrolment as an Advocate along with necessary documents on 30.03.2015. It appears that the police having apprehended a student, was taken to the police station, where petitioner shown to have went there to rescue the student to get him released, for which, the police were not agreeable. In this regard, a commotion took place. For having went there to the police station with a group of people, FIR has been registered against the petitioner and others, which is pending for more than one year and no final report has been filed so far. There is no act of attempt murder, neither a case of murder nor rape. Technically, either of the respondent authorities are also not taking any decision to enroll the petitioner, eventhough, the petitioner was otherwise found eligible. Mere registration of FIR against any person is not a proof of any offence being committed to disable persons right.

4. In these circumstances, the writ petition is allowed, directing the respondents/bar Council to consider the case of the petitioner for enrolment, after verification of the documents available. No costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //