2020 (12) TMI 1075 - MADRAS HIGH COURT - Indian Laws

Head Note / Extract:
Dishonor of Cheque - insufficiency of funds - Petitioner borrowed the money from the advocate - only point raised by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner is that the respondent is being an Advocate, he ought not to have do the business of money lending - Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act - HELD THAT:- Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in V.C. RANGADURAI VERSUS D. GOPALAN AND ORS [1978 (10) TMI 155 - SUPREME COURT] held that the action of Advocate is against public policy and an act of professional misconduct. The proceedings under his complaint is felt to be abuse of process of law and have to be quashed. In the case on hand, when there is a specific bar for doing money lending business that too with his own client, the act of the respondent is amount to professional misconduct. Therefore, the entire proceedings initiated as against the petitioner is nothing but clear abuse of process of law and the complaint itself is liable to be quashed. Petition allowed.