The demeanour of an advocate will always be different from the demenaour of a layman. Considering the position they hold and the job they perform, lawyers react boisteroulsy in most situations. This is a character developed by them by virtue of the duty they perform for their clients, the Madras High Court has said.
Justice N. Anand Venkatesh observed so while quashing a criminal case registered against a lawyer for having picked up a quarrel with a Revenue Department official, on behalf of his client, during an eviction drive. The judge held that continuation of investigation in the case would result in abuse of process of court.
“The legal profession involves fighting for the rights of the clients and an advocate tends to react more aggressively even outside the courts. It may be true that the petitioner had expressed himself more strongly to defend the rights of his client but that by itself should not result in a criminal prosecution against an advocate,” the judge wrote.
He went on to state that a perusal of the facts that led to registration of the present case showed that “the main intention on the part of the petitioner was not to prevent the government officials from performing their function. On the other hand, the petitioner was only attempting to safeguard the rights of his client.”
Additional Public Prosecutor A. Damodaran told the court the case against advocate C. Raja was booked on the basis of a complaint lodged by Revenue Inspector Murugesan of Kolathur circle at Mettur Taluk in Salem district. The complainant had accused the lawyer of restraining him from performing his official duties.
However, on perusing the records, the judge found the advocate had filed a civil suit on behalf of his client before a District Munsif Court in Mettur. Hence, when the eviction drive was being carried out on December 31, 2022, he had gone to the spot to safeguard the interests of his client and had questioned the officials.
“Unfortunately, the same was taken to be causing obstruction from performing the official duty and the petitioner has also been arrayed as an accused in this case along with his client,” the judge said and observed the First Information Report needs to be certainly quashed with respect to the advocate alone.
The Kolathur police in Mettur Taluk had registered the FIR under Sections 341 (wrongful restraint) and 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty) of the Indian Penal Code.
