Coming to help of a Law graduate who was denied to be advocate by Bar council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry because in May,2018 , he played active role in Anti Sterlite protest against the Government copper plant , Madras High court directed the state Bar council to enrol him as an advocate on its roll .
The Bench observed , “There is difference between protesting against and against government policies , to assemble peacefully without arms is a fundamental right given under Article 19(1) (a) an (b) , right to freedom of speech and expression” . Every citizen has his different view on government policies and right to comment on it .
Court was hearing the matter where law graduate K.Shiva was denied to be enrolled as advocate by state Bar council when case referred to police for checking , it was told that 85 criminal cases are pending on you ,please bring clearance letter of no issues from court . Then only we will be able to enroll you .
Superintendent of police told to court that since 85 cases are pending , therefore no recommendation for him .
Court observed “Difference between person acting against government and that person protesting against policies of government”.
Court said that nowhere it is stated that person is involved in any heinous crime . His name is not involved in supplementary list by CBI of those offenders in protest . Court expressed its displeasure towards respondent 1 and 2 , how did they blindly believe the respondent 3 and not gone and enquired the details of matter .
We were shocked to notice that 81 out of 84 cases registered against the petitioner for incidents alleged to occour on May 22,2018 .
Court questioned that how without any charge of criminal conspiracy his presence is possible at various locations on same day , Is it a joke , how can petitioner be present at 83 different places .
Court further points that police failed to specifically submit how petitioner’s presence in whole case at different places and how he is alleged and on what basis .
There is no point of suspicion on petitioner as anti-national or anti-social , state bar council unjustly denied him enrolment on wrong reasons . The court orders .