The Court, therefore, suo motu impleaded both statutory authorities to place their views before the Court and to facilitate consideration of framing appropriate rules or guidelines based on a comprehensive study regarding practising advocates facing criminal prosecutions.

[07/08, 07:28] sekarreporter1: 30 to 40 Cases a Day: Madras HC Seeks Response from Bar Councils on Increasing Criminal Cases Against Practising Advocates https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2026/08/06/madras-hc-seeks-bar-council-response-criminal-cases-against-advocates/
[07/08, 07:29] sekarreporter1: “Skip to content

Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News

CONNECT

NAVIGATION
HomeCase Briefs30 To 40 Cases A Day: Madras Hc Seeks Response From Bar Councils On Increasing Criminal Cases Against Practising Advocates
30 to 40 Cases a Day: Madras HC Seeks Response from Bar Councils on Increasing Criminal Cases Against Practising Advocates
The Court held that while mere registration of an FIR does not attach stigma and every accused is presumed innocent, the increasing criminal cases involving practising advocates warrant institutional attention and policy consideration by the Bar Councils.

Published on August 6, 2026By Soumya Yadav

Madras High Court: In a criminal original petition under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) and Section 528, Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), filed by a practising advocate seeking relief in relation to criminal proceedings, a Single Judge Bench of D. Bharatha Chakravarthy, J., while permitting the respondent police to proceed with the investigation in accordance with law, expressed concern over the increasing number of criminal matters involving practising advocates coming before the Court. Observing that advocates are officers of the Court and constitute an integral part of the justice delivery system, the Court held that the issue had reached a stage where an appropriate policy decision may be required at the level of the Bar Council of India (BCI) and the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry (BCTNP). The Court, therefore, suo motu impleaded both statutory authorities to place their views before the Court and to facilitate consideration of framing appropriate rules or guidelines based on a comprehensive study regarding practising advocates facing criminal prosecutions.

Also Read: BCI Directs Universities to Inspect All Law Colleges Within Six Weeks; Warns Against Weekend and Evening Law Courses

Background

The petition arose from a criminal case in which relief was sought under Section 482 CrPC and Section 528 BNSS. The government advocate took notice for the first respondent. The Court issued notice to the second respondent, returnable by 24 August 2026, and permitted private notice. In the meanwhile, the respondent police were permitted to proceed with the investigation in accordance with law and directed to file their counter-affidavit before the next date of hearing.

During the course of hearing petitions filed under Section 482 CrPC and Section 528 BNSS, the Court noticed an increasing trend. In one category of cases, it was contended that the petitioners were already arrayed as accused in criminal cases before their enrolment as advocates and that such pendency of criminal proceedings could not, by itself, be a ground to deny them the right to practise the profession. In another category of cases, allegations were made that certain advocates continued to indulge in criminal activities even after enrolment. It was further noticed that, in several instances, such persons eventually became office-bearers or leaders of various Bar Associations.

Analysis

The Court emphasised that there can be no dispute with the settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that the mere registration of an FIR does not attach any stigma to a person. Every accused is presumed to be innocent until proved guilty in accordance with law, and this fundamental principle cannot be diluted.

However, the Court observed that when persons facing multiple criminal prosecutions become members of the Bar and thereafter aspire to occupy leadership positions in Bar Associations, the issue assumes a different dimension. The Court highlighted that advocates are officers of the Court and constitute an integral part of the justice delivery system. If persons facing serious criminal allegations become office-bearers of Bar Associations and their number manifoldly increases in every Bar, a legitimate concern arises as to whether they would be in a position to effectively safeguard the interests of the clients whom they represent and uphold the dignity and values expected of the legal profess