The Supreme Court of India strongly criticized an advocate on Friday for filing a plea in the Tamil Nadu cash-for-jobs scam case while also representing one of the accused in the same case. The court noted this as a clear case of professional misconduct.
The lawyer, N. Subramaniam, appeared on behalf of the Anti-Corruption Movement, an organization claiming to support the victims of the scam. However, Subramaniam is also the legal representative of accused number 18 in the trial, where former Tamil Nadu minister Senthil Balaji is the prime accused.
“The petition is drafted by Mr. N. Subramaniam, who is representing accused no. 18. The actions of the petitioner are not bonafide. The SLP is dismissed. We direct that a copy of this order be forwarded to the Secretary of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu for appropriate action,” the Supreme Court stated.
Read Also:- India and Pakistan Agree to Immediate Ceasefire After ‘Operation Sindoor’
A bench led by Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan dismissed the Special Leave Petition (SLP) filed by the Anti-Corruption Movement, which had challenged the order of the Special Court that allowed the clubbing of supplementary charge sheets with the main charge sheet.
During the hearing, Justice Oka questioned the credibility of the plea:
“You are appearing for the accused in the same case and also for an organization that claims to support the victims. How is that justified?”
Once the lawyer confirmed that he indeed represented an accused in the trial, the court made its stand clear. Justice Oka said a misconduct inquiry would be initiated.
The lawyer tried to distance himself by stating that he would step away from the case and let someone else represent the petitioner. However, the court observed that the Anti-Corruption Movement knowingly chose a lawyer who was already defending one of the accused.
Later, Advocate Pranav Sachdeva, appearing for Subramaniam, mentioned that Subramaniam had a good reputation and had taken up several pro bono cases in Chennai. But the court emphasized that the matter had already been heard in full:
“We gave ample opportunity. Now the order has been passed. Representing both victims and accused, even if partly in pro bono, is still misconduct,” said Justice Oka.
Read Also:- MP High Court Finds Driver’s Dismissal for Delay in VIP Duty Disproportionate
When Subramaniam claimed he had offered to withdraw, Justice Oka responded sharply:
“Is that enough?”
The bench insisted that Subramaniam must submit an unconditional apology and give a written undertaking not to appear in any matter related to the case. The Anti-Corruption Movement must also file an affidavit confirming it would not initiate any further proceedings related to the offence.
“Only after these two affidavits are filed can a recall of the order be considered,” Justice Oka clarified.
Background
Earlier, on March 28, 2025, the Madras High Court had dismissed four petitions filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. These petitions challenged orders passed by the trial court on September 18 and October 1, 2024. The trial court had clubbed four supplementary charge sheets in a corruption case involving fraudulent appointments in the Chennai Metropolitan Transport Corporation.
The High Court upheld the decision, stating that all the charges were part of a single transaction involving the same documents and witnesses. Conducting separate trials would have led to delays, as each witness and document would need to be presented repeatedly.
Notably, out of 2,202 accused, only 423 had appeared so far, highlighting the scale of the scam and the delay in proceedings.
Case Details:
Case no. - SLP (Crl) Nos. 6885-6888/2025, Diary No. 19956/2025
Case Title: Anti-Corruption Movement v. State Represented by Assistant Commissioner of Police
