A lawyer has submitted a request to the Madras High Court, asking for guidelines to be established regarding the maximum number of attorneys allowed to represent and accompany litigants, including VIPs and VVIPs, during their appearances in lower courts.

Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice PD Audikesavalu observed that while there were arguments presented regarding the authority of the Bar Council to create rules, the Bar Council itself was not initially involved as a party to the case. Consequently, the Bar Council was subsequently included as a party in the proceedings.

Advocate N Mahendra Babu, in his petition, alleged that during his presence at the Saidapet Court on July 14, 2023, he observed a situation where approximately 200 lawyers were accompanying K Annamalai, the Regional President of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), who was appearing in connection with a defamation case. The petitioner asserted that this occurrence led to a chaotic situation both inside and outside the court complex, almost resembling a stampede. Additionally, he brought to the court's attention that similar incidents had occurred in the past, specifically mentioning an incident in 2009 when Subramanian Swamy appeared in the Madras High Court.

Babu also put forth that the court building in question was of the same vintage as the Madras High Court itself and held historical significance as a heritage structure. He emphasized that the available space within the building was inadequate to accommodate the substantial rise in the number of cases, primarily attributed to population growth and the expansion of the city's boundaries.

Furthermore, he contended that in Tamil Nadu, it had become a commonplace practice for politicians to demonstrate their large following and popularity when attending court proceedings. He accused politicians of even engaging in the practice of offering monetary incentives to advocates when appearing for their trials.

Additionally, he asserted that members of the media were contributing to disturbances and creating a considerable degree of chaos within the court premises.

As there is presently no established upper limit on the number of lawyers permitted to represent a single accused, he made a formal representation to the Registrar General. In doing so, he requested the formulation of regulations pertaining to the maximum number of advocates permitted to represent clients in court.

Case: N Mahendra Babu v. The Registrar General, WP 22971 of 2023.