The Madras High Court Bench here has denied anticipatory bail to an advocate accused of settling a motor accident claim case before a Mega Lok Adalat after the death of the injured victim and withdrawing the compensation amount from the bank account of the deceased without the knowledge of the latter’s legal heirs.
Dismissing his advance bail plea, Justice S. Vaidyanathan said: “ This case is a perfect illustration for the deceitfulness exhibited by an advocate towards his client without bothering about his professional etiquette... In the present case on hand, the conduct of the petitioner / Advocate has brought disrespect to the entire legal fraternity.
“The complainant has already lost her husband and is stated to have been struggling to lead her day to-day life. To add fuel to it, the petitioner has deceived her... If an advocate’s act creates disrespect to his profession and he feels that he is unfit for the profession, it is advisable to stop his practice on his own in order to safeguard the interest of the profession.”
The judge said that custodial interrogation of the lawyer was very much necessary since he was accused of entering into a settlement with a private insurance company during a Mega Lok Adalat conducted at Periyakulam in Theni district on March 14 last after receiving Rs.1.2 lakh as against a claim of Rs.5 lakh made by the complainant’s husband when he was alive.
Expressing shock over such an allegation having been levelled against a lawyer who had reportedly withdrawn the amount using the thumb impressions of the deceased, the judge said: “Law is not a mere private profession, it is an integral part of the judicial system of the State. As an officer of the court, a lawyer should uphold the dignity and integrity of the court and must exercise at all times respect for the Court in both words and deeds.
“His profession should be his pride and to preserve its honour should be among his chief concerns. An Advocate shall, at all times, conduct himself in a manner befitting his status as an officer of the court.”
The judge also took note of the fact that the lawyer had settled as many as 80 cases on the day of the Mega Lok Adalat and only a detailed investigation would reveal whether he had indulged in similar acts in other cases too.
