High court flags unholy police-advocate alliance in narcotic drugs-related cases

Madurai: Madras high court has unearthed an unholy trinity involving a court-duty constable, advocates handling narcotic drugs-related cases and the jurisdictional inspectors of police in colluding among themselves to file cases on behalf of accused, even without the latter’s consent. It also took note of the fact that one particular advocate was filing vakalat in about 80% of narcotic drugs cases, that too without the signature of consent of the accused.
Underscoring the statutory responsibility of the state Bar council and the director-general of police to dismantle the unholy alliance, Justice B Pugalendhi likened it to ambulance-chasers, lawyers and police personnel involved in the motor accident related- cases, and said: “The Bar council and the DGP have to take a call on this issue and provide necessary instructions to their members and officials to protect and maintain the dignity of this institution.The DGP shall also find out the possibility of changing the court duty constables periodically, since continuation of the very same officers for court duty may lead to formation of syndicate.”
Justice Pugalenthi took a serious view of advocates filing bail petitions without the knowledge of the accused persons, and recorded the court-appointed amicus curiae S Anantha Narayan’s submission that there was an unholy trinity – the court-duty policemen, advocate and the inspector of police concerned.
“The main culprit is the court-duty cop. Once a person is taken into custody in a narcotic drugs case, their relatives approach the police station, where the court-cop directly interacts with them. He appraises them about the case, gives the address and phone number of their advocate and directly informs the advocate. The court-cop fixes the fees in most cases, and it would be shared among them,” the amicus curiae told the court.
If the accused chooses his own advocate, the accused will face tough time as the case details would not be informed to his advocate and the inspector of police does not reply to the bail petition, he said. “If a surprise check is made in the police station, the visiting cards of those advocates who are having nexus with police officers, can be found,” he added.
Justice Pugalendhi said, “we are also witnessing the manner in which the Motor Accident Claims Original Petitions are filed and the quantum of fees charged in those cases. Those who are having nexus with police alone can practice before the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunals. Everyone, including the members of the Bar Council, is aware of this fact. However, we have no courage to correct this unhealthy system.”
The faith and confidence of a common man in this institution would be retained only when our system functions in the proper manner, the judge said, adding: “It is not the responsibility of the court alone, but also the members of the Bar.”
The court made the observations while granting bail to Tony alias Anto Varghese of Kerala, who was arrested by the Nagamalai Pudukottai police in Madurai, in connection with a narcotic drugs case. Earlier, the court took note of the fact that two counsel appeared for the petitioner. One of the two had filed the memo of appearance without the signature of the petitioner.