- Judge Withdraws From Hearing
- Vigilance Inquiry Ordered Immediately
- Allegation Surfaces In Open Court
Article Today, Chennai:
A serious allegation of bribery has unsettled proceedings at the Madras High Court. A senior advocate is accused of collecting Rs. 50 lakh from a client, allegedly claiming the money was meant to influence a judge. The claim emerged through a formal complaint that reached judicial authorities and the Union law ministry. The episode has triggered an internal vigilance inquiry.
Case Background
The matter arose from an appeal linked to proceedings in a special CBI court in Chennai. The appeal was listed before Justice M. Nirmal Kumar. According to the complaint, the advocate told his client that a favourable order could be secured only after paying Rs. 50 lakh. The client later alleged that the money was collected under this assurance.
Judge Recuses From Hearing
When the complaint reached the court registry, Justice Nirmal Kumar took note of it during the hearing. He expressed concern that his name had been invoked in connection with the alleged payment. Subsequently, he recused himself from the case, citing ethical responsibility. He also requested that the matter be placed before another bench. The recusal aimed to preserve institutional integrity and avoid any perception of conflict.
Vigilance Inquiry Initiated
Meanwhile, the High Court directed its vigilance wing to examine the allegations. The inquiry will determine whether the advocate acted alone or if any court staff were involved. Officials have been instructed to collect relevant records and statements. The court emphasised that misuse of a judge’s name for monetary gain is a grave matter.
Professional Conduct Under Scrutiny
In addition, legal experts have pointed out that such allegations, if proven, could attract disciplinary action under the Advocates Act. Bar authorities may consider suspension or cancellation of licence in cases involving proven misconduct. Criminal proceedings may also follow if evidence establishes fraudulent intent.
Institutional Reputation At Stake
The incident has raised broader questions about professional accountability within the legal system. Courts rely on public confidence to function effectively. Therefore, even unverified allegations of financial influence can cause reputational harm. Observers note that prompt inquiry and transparent findings will be crucial in restoring trust.
The vigilance investigation is expected to proceed in the coming weeks. Until then, the case remains under scrutiny. The outcome may have implications not only for the individuals involved but also for standards of conduct within the wider legal fraternity.
