Kirubakaran J castigates hooligan lawyers, laments falling standards of the legal profession

In a recently passed order, Justice N Kirubakaran of the Madras High Court has lashed out at advocates who resort to hooliganism, particularly when it comes to taking forcible possession of property..In doing so, the judge has also made some scathing observations regarding the falling standards of the legal profession, with special emphasis on the deteriorating quality of legal education..Factual Background.Kirubakaran J was hearing a batch of petitions related to the possession of a medical college that was forced to shut down owing lack of adequate infrastructure. Students of the college sought to be transferred to alternate state institutions on the basis of an entitlement certificate issued by the central government. Senior Advocate A Sirajudeen appeared on behalf of the student-petitioners. Senior Advocate R Singaravelan, represented the original trustees of the institution..During the course of hearing, photographs showing persons “identifying themselves as Advocates wearing black and white dress” stationed inside the college building were submitted to the Court. The said persons were purportedly stationed in a show of intimidation as the old and new trustees clashed over possession of the said land. Reprimanding ruffian tactics, including the common practice of resorting to “Kangaroo courts“, the judge ordered,.“This kind of practice has to be stopped immediately and it should not be repeated anywhere in Tamil Nadu and so, the matter has to be viewed very seriously. Appropriate and immediate action has to be initiated sternly against the persons involved in the offence by filing FIR against them by the Police and also by initiating disciplinary proceedings by the Bar Council.”.Observing that incidents of such high handed behaviour of so-called lawyers were on the rise, the Court made special note of this aspect. Kirubakaran J observed,.“This trend is prevalent for the past few years in Tamil Nadu. It is a classic case to demonstrate as to why the people do not exhibit their faith either in the judiciary or in the police and have faith only on the persons in “black and white dress” claiming themselves as Advocates, to be engaged as “paid hooligans” to involve in property disputes. To put it in other words, these alleged lawyers act like extra constitutional authority.”.In order passed on October 10, the Court made a series of observations relevant to this issue..Falling Standards of Law Students and Legal Education.In his order, Kirubakaran J has highlighted concerns regarding the easy availability of purchasable law degrees, criminalisation of the legal profession and inadequacy of measures to ensure thorough legal education befitting the noble profession..Referring to the case of SM Anantha Murugan v Chairman, Bar Council of India, which had addressed the issue earlier, Justice Kirubakaran noted,.“It is a fact that persons with criminal background are entering into this profession by purchasing law degrees from letter pad law colleges, especially from Andhra Pradesh and Karnataka, which are selling law degrees for price without even conducting regular college.”.The Court also specifically noted that criminal elements were entering the legal profession by taking advantage of loop holes in 50 year old Advocates’ Act, 1961..It was further observed that there was another dangerous trend of obtaining law degrees irregularly in absentia without even attending the classes from the colleges. Moreover,.“…some of those persons, after retiring from service are making use of their irregular law degrees obtained during their service to enroll jeopardizing the practice of the younger advocates who are wedded to the profession.”.In this context, he referred to the case of P Ramu v The Secretary, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu. Dealing with similar cases of irregular enrolment, the Court had said,.“…a law graduate needs proper training, at least, for a few years to get exposure to various Acts and Developments in Law. Then only, they would be in a position to advise their clients properly.”.Another concern highlighted is the mushrooming of law colleges across the country in surplus of the actual demand. Reference has been made to remarks made in 2010 by erstwhile ex-officio BCI Chairman, Gopal Subramanium, who said that India only required around 175 law colleges as opposed to the then 800. It had been recommended that steps be taken to reduce the number of law colleges accordingly..However, the country saw a rapid increase in law colleges since, without application of mind, regardless of demand and supply principles and without knowing what is the requirement for the Advocates as on date in the society. On this aspect, Kirubakaran J remarked,.“Instead of bringing excellence in legal education, the bar council had institutionalized mediocrity….…The present situation has arisen because the persons who possess law degrees do not have any briefs in their hands and hence, they are constrained to indulge in these kind of criminal activities. Therefore, the Bar Council of India and the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu should be squarely blamed for the present situation. ”.The judge has also referred to K Sakthi Rani v. Secretary of Bar Council of Tamil Nadu, in which the Madras High Court had prohibited the enrolment of open university degree holders. Despite the order, it was observed that,.“…the Bar Council had merrily allowed more than 1000 persons who had obtained degrees from open university without any formal education to get enrolled as advocates who are practicing in various Courts in Tamil Nadu.”.Remedial approach to restore the glory of the legal profession.Asserting that thorough education has to be ensured for legal graduates, Justice Kribakaran opined that it was time the Bar Council of India makes the biometric attendance system mandatory in law colleges. He has also recommended the creation of a centralised portal containing the details of the teaching staff available in the law colleges/institutions throughout India..In the interest of promoting excellence in the legal education, he suggested that the BCI prescribe a minimum of 75% marks in the class 12 examination, or a minimum prescribed mark in CLAT examination, to secure admission in the law colleges throughout India..Due diligence in verification of candidates seeking to be enrolled, as per the directions in the SM Anantha Murugan case, is also necessary to ensure that criminal candidates are not allowed to enter the legal profession..The judge remarked,.“The Union Government has to take appropriate steps to set right the legal profession based on the recommendations of the law commission, otherwise things will go out of control.”.It was however clarified that the comments made were not directed to the legal fraternity as a whole, but rather were aimed at a narrower delinquent class of lawyers,.“It is made clear that the justice delivery system would not be effective without effective participation of the lawyers who are the officers of the Court. Only minuscule of lawyers are indulging in these kind of activities and the observations made in this order is intended only against those unruly elements and not against the persons who are regular practitioners….…The endeavor of this Court is only to safeguard the practicing advocates and also to restore the glorious image of legal profession and to streamline the legal education as well as the profession.”.Errant Advocates to be held responsible.When the matter came up for hearing yesterday, the judge reiterated that such incidents should not be allowed to continue. The Court has ordered that affidavits be submitted furnishing information regarding the advocates engaged by the trustees, who may have resorted to the reported hooligan behaviour, before October 20. Failing the same, the Court has directed that the police initiate criminal proceedings against the trustees, except in respect of specifically exempted persons..As regards the main prayer concerning the medical students, the Court has directed that they approach the Supreme Court, in light of the fact that proceedings had already been initiated by the management before the Apex Court..The Bar Council of India, the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry and other concerned state authorities have been impleaded in the case vide the order passed on October 10. The matter is posted to be heard next on October 24..Read copy of Order passed on October 10, 2017 here.Read copy of Order passed on October 12, 2017 here:.Image taken from here..Click here to download the Bar & Bench Android App