Dismissed¶24

R.Kanimozhi v. the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu

Writ Petition (Article 226, Constitution of India) – W.P.No.9993 of 2026

Madras HC3 Jun 2026WP/9993/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras High Court, 03.06.2026, W.P.No.9993 of 2026 — Article 226 writ petition seeking mandamus to the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry to reconsider Complaint No.337/2022 afresh and refer it to a Disciplinary Committee for enquiry under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961 regarding respondent KVP Deepakraj; withdrawn by petitioner's counsel G.V.Sridharan and dismissed as withdrawn with no order as to costs; coram: Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari (authoring) and Justice G.Arul Murugan; Bar Council represented by standing counsel C.K.Chandrasekkar; no issues decided, no precedents cited.

What the court decided

AI extract

R.Kanimozhi Vs the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2026)

¶1

W.P.No.9993 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 03.06.2026

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR. SUSHRUT ARVIND DHARMADHIKARI, CHIEF JUSTICE AND

¶6

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ARUL MURUGAN

¶7

W.P.No.9993 of 2026

¶8

R.Kanimozhi W/o. Krishna Prakash, D/o. A.Ramamurthy, New No. 78, Old No. 15/1 1st Street Extn., Parameswari Nagar, Adyar, Chennai 600 020

¶9

Petitioner

¶10

¶11

1.The Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Puducherry, Rep. by the Secretary, High Court Campus, Chennai 600 104

¶12

2.KVP Deepakraj S/o. K.V.Ponniah, No.21, Vadugu Street, Mylapore, Chennai 600 004 M/s.1216/ 1999

¶13

Respondents

¶14

_______________ Page 1 of 4_

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

W.P.No.9993 of 2026

¶17

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

¶18

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to reconsider Complaint No.337/2022 afresh in accordance with law and refer it to a Disciplinary Committee for a full-fledged inquiry into the conduct of the 2nd respondent Committee for enquiry under Section 35 of the Advocates Act, 1961.

¶19

For Petitioner: Mr. G.V.Sridharan

¶20

For Respondents: Mr. C.K.Chandrasekkar Standing Counsel for R1

¶21

ORDER

¶22

(Order of the Court was made by the Hon'ble Chief Justice)

¶23

Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks to withdraw the writ petition.

¶24

The writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn. There shall be no order as to costs.