The Madras High Court has instructed the Crime Branch-Criminal Investigation Department (CBCID) to investigate a law firm and its associates for their alleged involvement in forum shopping, misrepresentation, and efforts to legalize unlawful activities in a disputed land transaction. The court took serious note of professional misconduct and unethical practices by legal professionals.
Read Also:- Madras High Court Stays ED's Attachment Of Director Shankar’s Property Over Copyright Dispute
"An analysis of the entire facts and circumstances of the case, including the documents produced, prima facie reveals that the team consisting of Jamal Mohammed Ibrahim, Ms. Preethi Baskar, Kamalesh (the petitioner), and their accomplices appear to have engaged in forum shopping, misrepresented the court, and attempted to legitimize illegal activities, thus making a mockery of the judicial system," the court observed.
Formation of a Special Investigation Team
Justice A.D. Jagadish Chandira ordered a special investigation team, led by an officer of Deputy Commissioner rank, to conduct a preliminary probe into the police complaints filed against the parties. The court directed the investigating team to determine the role of the law firm and its associates in the case, as well as any pending cases against them.
Strict Compliance With Standard Procedures
The court emphasized that all police personnel in Tamil Nadu must strictly follow the Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) while registering complaints and issuing Community Service Registers (CSRs). If a complaint regarding immovable property needs to be closed as a civil dispute, legal advice from the Public Prosecutor must be obtained beforehand.
Bar Council Inquiry Into Legal Credentials
The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry was also instructed to conduct a detailed investigation into the educational qualifications and enrollment of the advocates involved. The court mandated verification of the law firm's legitimacy and compliance with professional ethics.
Read Also:- Madras High Court Orders Centre to Lift Ban on Ananda Vikatan's Website Over Modi-Trump Cartoon
"Shall ensure that proper action is taken against individuals advertising their legal services unlawfully and issue a public notice warning citizens against being misled by fraudulent law firms or misleading social media advertisements. Shall also ensure that strict adherence to internship programs is maintained in letter and spirit in legal education," the court stated.
Importance of Professional Ethics in Law
The court reiterated the noble nature of the legal profession, stressing that it is not a trade or business. Any compromise in professional ethics could erode public trust in the judiciary.
"The legal profession is a noble calling, not a commercial enterprise. Advocates must be scrupulously honest and fair in their dealings with clients. Any compromise with professional ethics will undermine public faith in the rule of law. Any form of professional misconduct must be viewed seriously," the court emphasized.
Legal Representatives and Case Background
The civil revision petition was filed by Kamalesh Chandrasekaran against an order by the Assistant City Civil Court, which was later upheld by the Additional City Civil Court, denying an injunction order. The petitioner had initially claimed that he had agreed to purchase the disputed property for ₹7.25 crore after facilitating the removal of 67 illegal occupants. However, he alleged that the respondents failed to uphold their commitment to sell the property, instead colluding with third parties to dispose of it for a higher price.
Read Also:- Matrimonial Dispute Alone Cannot Prove Husband's Guilt: Madras High Court Acquits Man in Wife's Death Case
During the hearing, the court observed irregularities in the case, including the fact that the petitioner’s legal counsel had previously represented the respondents in a related matter. Additionally, it was revealed that the petitioner was the manager of the same law firm where his counsel had previously worked and had represented the respondents.
Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. V. Prakash, Senior Advocate for M/s. Preethi Basker
Counsel for the Respondent: Mr .S.Ganesan for M/s.Colonel Ganesan Associates, Mr.P.Gurunathan, Additional Government Pleader (CS), Mr.V.J.Priyadarsana, Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side) [For Asst. Commissioner of Police, Kotturpuram], Ms.Greetha Senthilkumar, Secretary [For Bar Council of Tamil Nadu & Puducherry]
Case Title: Kamalesh Chandrasekaran v. MA Noor Jehan Beevi and Others
Case No: C.R.P.No.443 of 2025
