NIL GIRLS BAR ASSOCIATION Vs. T K MAHALINGAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Nilgiris Bar Association (Tamil Nadu) is in no mood to reconcile with the easy escape made by an imposter in the legal profession from the penal clutches of law. Without enrollment with any Bar Council and without any academic qualification to practise law he managed to get entry into the legal profession by wangling a membership from the Nilgiris Bar Association, and flourished in his practice as an advocate before all the courts including sessions courts in the district for a long period of eight years. But his hay days did not last longer as the vigilant Bar discovered that he was an interloper in the profession. A complaint was lodged with the police and after investigation a charge-sheet was laid before the Judicial Magistrate concerned. He then adopted a strategy to skip out of the penal tentacles by pleading guilty to the charge and praying for mercy of the Court. The strategy worked as the magistrate released him under S. 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act 1958 (for short 'the Act').

(2.) The concerned Bar Association aggrieved by the manner in which they and the litigant public were hood-winked by the said person for a pretty long period, approached the High Court of Madras in revision challenging the order of the magistrate. A single Judge of the High Court, after about ten years, passed the impugned order declining to interfere, but made an endeavour to console the Bar by directing the delinquent person to donate a sum of Rs. 15,000/- to the Association for buying books to their library. The accused person promptly dispatched a bank draft containing the amount to the Bar Association but they with matching promptness spurned down the ill-gotten money and rushed to this Court with the Special Leave Petition seeking redressal of their grievances. Special leave is granted.

(3.) A few more facts may be necessary. Respondent (TK Mahalingam) approached the Nilgiris Bar Association in the year 1978 for admitting him as a member therein by representing that he was a qualified legal practitioner having enrolled himself with the State Bar Council. Without suspecting the bona fides of the application he was admitted to the membership of the Bar Association. He started his practice at the new station and built up a good clientele and involved himself in all the activities of the Association. He contested for the post of Secretary and won it. In this way, he continued till 1985. But by then some members of the Bar who developed suspicion of his credentials made secret inquiries and discovered that he was imposturing as an advocate and his credentials were bogus. So they brought it to the notice of the Bar Association who, in an emergent meeting, decided to launch prosecution against him. Respondent, sensing the developments against him ducked out of the scene. A complaint was filed with the local police for offences of false personation and cheating etc. The police, after investigation, charge-sheeted the case for offences under Ss. 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.