Madras HC Judge Recuses Over Bribery Allegations, Urges Vigilance Probe
Madras HC Judge Recuses Over Bribery Allegations, Urges Vigilance Probe
A Madras High Court judge recuses himself amid bribery claims against a senior advocate, urging a vigilance inquiry to uphold judicial integrity.
In a development that underscores concerns about judicial integrity, Justice M. Nirmal Kumar of the Madras High Court recused himself from hearing a pending petition after a representation reached the court alleging that a Chennai-based senior advocate accepted ₹50 lakh from a client to secure a favorable order. The judge disclosed the communication in open court and said a vigilance inquiry should be considered to ensure the court’s integrity.
The representation, forwarded by a Chennai-based association and routed through the Union law ministry, claimed that advocate M Murali Kumaran, counsel for the petitioner in the original petition, took ₹50 lakh from the client with the understanding that the money would be given to the judge presiding over the matter in return for a favorable ruling. An FIR at the ACB police station in Faridabad was registered on December 5 against Kumaran and the client for bribery and extortion, adding a wider frame to the controversy surrounding the case. The matter came to light on February 5 this year when Justice Kumar was hearing an original petition filed in 2014 and a related criminal revision from 2015, both linked to proceedings before a Special Court for CBI cases in Chennai.
However, the judge recused from the hearing after the high court registry informed the court that it had received a communication from the Union law ministry, enclosing a representation by the All India Lawyers Association for Justice (AILAJ). The senior advocate denied the allegations, calling them “totally false” and stated his willingness to cooperate with any inquiry. The court’s order noted that the judge had shared the contents of the communication in open court with the Special Public Prosecutor for the CBI and with Kumaran himself.
The judge’s recusal from hearing two cases pertaining to the allegation and his instruction to the Registry to bring the issue to the notice of the Chief Justice highlight the seriousness with which the judiciary views such claims. The case has reignited debates about accountability and ethics within the legal establishment, even as investigators pursue the broader allegations surrounding the bribery and extortion charges.
The ongoing inquiry and public discussion reflect a pivotal moment for transparency in judicial proceedings, with authorities signaling that any attempt to influence court outcomes will be scrutinized and addressed.
