“Lawyers Acted As Henchmen”: Madras High Court Asks DGP To Take Action Against Lawyers Indulging In Land Grabbing

Justice Sunder Mohan directed the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry to extend full cooperation to the police. The court also asked the Bar Council to conduct an enquiry into the alleged involvement of lawyers in the land grabbing cases

“This Court also directs the Director General of Police, Chennai, to issue suitable instructions to the Station House Officers to take stern action against not only the parties concerned but also the lawyers who indulge in such activities in future. The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and the lawyers' Associations shall render cooperation to the police officials in dealing with such activities with an iron hand,” the court said.

The court was hearing anticipatory bail petitions filed by persons who were charged under Sections 329(3), 329(4), 115(2), 324(4), 324(5), 324(6), 351(3), 61(2) of BNS, 2023 and Section 3(1) of Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 1984. The case against the petitioners was that they had barged into the property of the defacto complainant along with some lawyers and attempted to vacate them claiming that there was an injunction order passed by the District Munsiff Court. It was alleged that the petitioners beat up the employees of the de facto complainant, committed mischief and damaged the property, including CCTV cameras and the memory card.

Seeking anticipatory bail, the petitioners had argued that the property originally belonged to them. During the hearing, it was also submitted that the lawyers were present only to explain the contents of the order and the allegations of forceful entry was false.

The Government Advocate submitted that though the petitioners had an injunction order, their act of engaging lawyers to take possession in an illegal manner must be condemned. The court was also informed that several lawyers had WhatsApp groups calling upon the lawyers to engage in such activities and interfere in property disputes and other monetary disputes. The government advocate submitted that the legal profession has been used as a cloak to indulge in such criminal activities and unless it was strictly dealt with, it would continue.

Criticising the entire event, the court noted that the lawyers in the present case, had acted as henchmen for the litigants and forgotten that they belonged to a noble professions. The court added that while litigants acting in such manner was not new to the courts, the lawyers were expected to behave in a dignified manner, following the Bar Council of India Rules.

Noting that junior lawyers often engaged in these kind of activities due to financial constraints, the court asked the junior lawyers who had no bad antecedents and were engaged by the administrators of the WhatsApp groups to appear before the disciplinary committee of Bar Council of Tamil Nadu omnce a month for an year and file monthly report detailing their professional work. The court also directed the Bar Council to assist the lawyers if they wish to join a senior's office and asked senior lawyers to consider training the young lawyers by accommodating them in their office.

“The above directions are made keeping in mind the fact that the junior lawyers who have no guidance and are in financial need are indulging in such activities not realising the fact that such activities, would not only affect their careers but, as stated earlier, bring disrepute to the noble profession,” the court said.

In the present case, noting that a custodial interrogation was not necessary, the court granted anticipatory bail to the parties and directed them to pay Rs. 3 Lakh to the Tamil Nadu State Legal Services Authority, High Court. The court also directed the parties to deposit a sum of Rs. 10 Lakh to the credit of the case.

Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. S. R. Rajagopal, Sr. Counsel for Mr. P. Nagarajan, Mr. A. Ramesh, Sr. Counsel for Mr. Praveen Purohit, Mr. S. Prabakaran, Sr. Counsel for Mr. Krishnakumar

Counsel for Respondent: Mr. S. Santhosh Govt. Advocate (Crl. Side), Mr. K. Jagannathan (for intervenor)

Case Title: J Vijayakumar v. State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 146

Case No: Crl.O.P.Nos.8329 & 7856 of 2025