Madras HC says you can’t kill a case at the notice stage. If allegations look like an offence on face value, the magistrate should hear it. Advocates must defend themselves there, not get HC to quash it early.

[02/05, 12:35] sekarreporter1: “Justice Gowri agreed and refused to interfere. The court noted that the petitions challenged only show cause notices and that the advocates could present their defence before the magistrate. It held that the allegations, if taken at face value, could constitute an offence and that”
https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/madras-hc-dismisses-petitions-by-advocates-challenging-misconduct-proceedings-101777627623915.html#:~:text=Justice%20Gowri%20agreed%20and%20refused%20to%20interfere.%20The%20court%20noted%20that%20the%20petitions%20challenged%20only%20show%20cause%20notices%20and%20that%20the%20advocates%20could%20present%20their%20defence%20before%20the%20magistrate.%20It%20held%20that%20the%20allegations%2C%20if%20taken%20at%20face%20value%2C%20could%20constitute%20an%20offence%20and%20that
[02/05, 12:35] sekarreporter1: *Madras HC | Justice Gowri*
*Date*: May 2026

—

### *1. What happened?*
*HC dismisses petitions by advocates* challenging misconduct proceedings. Justice Gowri refused to interfere.

### *2. Court’s reasoning*
1. *Only show cause notices*: Petitioners were challenging just show cause notices, not final orders.
2. *Defence before magistrate*: Advocates can present their defence before the magistrate in the ongoing proceedings.
3. *Prima facie offence*: Court held that the allegations, if taken at face value, *could constitute an offence*.

### *3. Impact*
HC won’t stall misconduct proceedings at show cause stage. The advocates must face the inquiry and respond to allegations before the lower court/magistrate.

—

*Bottom Line*: Madras HC says you can’t kill a case at the notice stage. If allegations look like an offence on face value, the magistrate should hear it. Advocates must defend themselves there, not get HC to quash it early.