Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court addressed the appeals concerning the legality of resolutions passed by Bar Associations that refused to defend certain accused individuals. The appellant, A.S. Mohammed Rafi, sought redress against the High Court of Madras's order, which had appointed a Commission of Enquiry. The court noted that the High Court's judgment was not repeated in detail as it was already set out in the impugned order. The court quashed two FIRs against the appellant and directed the State of Tamil Nadu to pay him compensation of Rs.1,50,000/-, of which he had already received Rs.50,000/-. The court expressed deep concern over the resolutions passed by Bar Associations across India, which prohibited members from defending certain accused persons, stating that such actions were illegal and against the traditions of the legal profession. The court referenced historical examples and constitutional provisions to reinforce the principle that every accused has the right to legal representation, regardless of public opinion or the nature of the charges. The court declared these resolutions null and void, urging lawyers to uphold their duty to defend all individuals. The appeals were disposed of without costs, and the court ordered the circulation of the judgment to all Bar Associations in India.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Right to Counsel - Legal Representation - Article 22(1) of the Constitution of India - The court emphasized that every accused has the right to be defended in court, regardless of the nature of the charges against them. It held that resolutions by Bar Associations refusing to defend certain individuals are illegal and against professional ethics (Paras 14-32). B) Criminal Law - Quashing of FIR - Compensation - FIR No.2105 of 2006 and FIR No.2106 of 2006 quashed - The court directed the State of Tamil Nadu to pay Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation to the appellant, of which Rs.50,000/- had already been received (Paras 7-9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the resolutions passed by Bar Associations refusing to defend certain accused persons are legal and valid.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court quashed FIR No.2105 of 2006 and FIR No.2106 of 2006, directed the State of Tamil Nadu to pay Rs.1,50,000/- as compensation to the appellant, and declared the resolutions of Bar Associations refusing to defend certain accused persons as illegal and void.
Law Points
- Right to Counsel
- Quashing of FIR
- Compensation
- Professional Ethics
- Bar Association Resolutions
