MOHANRAJ Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE issue involved in this case is non-satisfaction of professional charges of a lawyer, who defended the case of the State before the Apex Court, as directed by the Honourable Supreme Court.

(2.) THE gist of factual position as revealed from the writ petition is that, the petitioner was appointed as Additional Public Prosecutor, to assist the Special Public Prosecutor for conducting the Liquor Tragedy Case, Kollam vide Ext. P1 Government Order dated 28.03.2001. According to him, the duty cast upon him was discharged effectively and satisfactorily, leading to conviction and sentence of the accused concerned. Finally, the matter was taken up before the Apex Court, by the convicts and during the course of hearing, the Apex Court desired to have the assistance of the petitioner as well, to arrive at a proper finding and the petitioner was required to appear before the Apex Court as well. Pursuant to the above direction, the petitioner appeared before the Apex Court on 'six days' and satisfactorily discharged the duties, finally leading to dismissal of the Crl. Appeal No. 1528 of 2005 preferred on behalf of the convicts. The decision of the Apex Court has been reported in (2011) 5 SCC 162 (Chandran Vs. State of Kerala). The assistance of the petitioner was also appreciated in the said decision in paragraph 134, in the following terms:

(3.) PURSUANT to the said order, the concerned respondent sanctioned only Rs. 55,000/- as per Ext. P17 proceedings dated 21.12.2012 along with I.A. No. 4840 of 2010 and the cheque for the said amount (Ext. P19) was forwarded to the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a balance sum of Rs.29439/- is still to be satisfied and that, absolutely no reason is there, as to why the amount has been restricted and reduced to the extent as shown in Ext. P17.