(1.) LEARNED senior counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr K. Doraisamy, learned public Prosecutor for the respondents.
(2.) THE petitioner was arrested on 20-8-2003 in chennai in connection with the case in Cr. No. 145/2003 for the alleged offences under Passport Act. Final report was filed after investigation and was taken on file in c. C. No. 736/2004 for the alleged offences under Section 12 (1) (b) and (d) (e) and 12 (1a) (a) of Indian Passport Act. As the petitioner is a Nepali citizen and he does not have sufficient means to engage a lawyer of his choice, he made a request to the learned magistrate to provide a lawyer of his choice at the cost of the State. For the said purpose, he filed a petition under Section 304 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The said section contemplates that in a trial before the Court of Session, in the event of the accused is not represented by a pleader, and where it appears to the Court that the accused has no sufficient means to engage a pleader, the. Court shall assign a pleader for his defence at the expenses of the State. In this context, the petitioner has also quoted the name of an advocate Mr. C. Vijayakumar, having his office at 1134, Thambu Chetty street, Chennai-1 to defend him in the trial. The learned Magistrate, however, refused to accept his request on the ground that the name of the said advocate is not included in the panel of advocates of that court. Hence, the present writ petition is filed to issue a writ of mandamus to direct respondents 2 and 3 to nominate the said advocate to defend the petitioner in the said case, pending before the 3rd respondent and to direct the 3rd respondent to conduct the chief examination afresh.
(3.) MR. K. Chandru, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that though the application was filed under Section 304 of the Code of Criminal procedure, the right to engage the lawyer of the choice of the petitioner could be traced under Section 303 of the Code of Criminal procedure, which contemplates that any person accused of an offence before a criminal court, or against whom proceedings are instituted under the Code, may of right be defended by a pleader of his choice. Hence the petitioner may be permitted to engage the services of the lawyer of his choice.