Begin typing your search...

MHC adjourns a plea to fix maximum advocates to accompany VIP litigants

The petition stated that the contrived grouped lesser space as many as 75 advocates are daily fighting for their foot hold to stand before each courts.

MHC adjourns a plea to fix maximum advocates to accompany VIP litigants
X

Madras High Court

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court adjourned a petition seeking to fix the maximum number of advocates can appear or accompany the VIP/VVIP litigant in subordinate courts.

A petitioner N. Mahendra Babu, moved the Madras High Court (MHC) to direct the registrar general of MHC to frame rules as to the maximum number of advocate appearing and accompanying the VIP/VVIP, litigant and public whenever they appear in the subordinate courts in the interest of justice.

The case was listed before the first division bench of the MHC comprising Chief Justice S V Gangapurwala and Justice P D Audikesavalu.

The petition stated that the contrived grouped lesser space as many as 75 advocates are daily fighting for their foot hold to stand before each courts.

On July 14, the State BJP president K Annamalai appeared in the Saidapet court to a defamation case filed by DMK treasurer T.R.Balu MP.

During appearance as many as 200 advocates accompanied under the captainship of the party functionary advocate Paul Kanagaraj, virtually made a stampede inside and outside the entire Saidapet court complex, contended the petitioner.

The petitioner further stated inorder to escape from the stampede he and other advocates moved away from the court complex.

He also pointed out the incident happened in MHC in February 2009, when Subramanian Swamy appeared in the court which resulted havoc situation, he argued.

He also submitted that the politicians are in the habit of gathering cheap popularity to avoid the erosion of their name in public are virtually paying money to the advocates whenever the political leaders are arrested and brought for the remand before the subordinate courts.

The counsel appeared for the Tamil Nadu and Puducherry Bar council sought time to file counter.

Accepting the submission the bench posted the matter to November 11 for further hearing.

DTNEXT Bureau
Next Story